Affordable Health care = Obamacare, Yes, indeed, President Obama does care.

Where is everyone this morning?

Speaking of missing persons - anyone seen George Zimmermans lawyer?

Seems he couldn't run fast enough from the Lawrence O'Donnell show last night...

Craig Sonner has been the first guest in the history of this particular show, to get scared, to be terrified, so terrified of coming on this show that he has literally run away. He's in our car right now, taking him home from our studio, afraid to face the questioning he would face on this show. Watch out for wherever Craig Sonner shows up next on television, because wherever he shows up next on television has an obligation to put him through serious questioning about what he's doing and what he knows, and the contradictions in the things he's already said on television.

I wonder if Mr. Sonner was afraid to answer some TOUGH questions like these;

Later on during the segment, O'Donnell turned to Sonner's empty chair and began reciting the many questions he had planned for the aborted interview. Those questions included:

• "Who is paying you, Mr. Lawyer?"
• "Does George Zimmerman have a job?"
• "Did you represent him when he was arrested for assault on a police officer in 2005?"
• "Your client was not injured enough to go to the hospital that night. You say he sought some sort of medical treatment the next day. Do you have those medical records that you can show us?"
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/26/craig-sonner-interview-lawrence-odonnell_n_1381578.html
• JUSTICE FOR TRAYVON MARTIN NOW!

A new survey of former attorneys who clerked for the current Supreme Court justices agree the court will most likely uphold the Affordable Care Act's individual mandates as constitutional. Even clerks for the court's four conservative justices place the probability of upholding the law well above the 50 percent threshold.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/03/poll-majority-supreme-court-insiders-expect-health-care-law-will-be-upheld/50334/

Pretty sad when the entire Supreme Court erupts in laughter at the White house Attorney defending this piece of crap legislation.

Wasn't it just a couple weeks ago that the entire white house press corp broke out in laughter when Jay Carney parroted another Obama lie.

Laughing stock Administration. The hits just keep on coming!

One of the key elements of "caring" is listening. Obama simply does not listen- or this discussion would not be taking place. The overwhelming majority of people rejected- and still reject- this health care idiocy. It has lost- rather than gained- support, and the overwhelming majority want it repealed.

How much does Obama "care" about that? Not much, it seems.

Yesterday, the news was full of reports about Obama's open mike moment. While revelatory of his mindset regarding the missile shield, it also raises the question: what else does he have planned for after "his" election?

What more does he plan on ramming down the throats of the electorate if he does not fear having to face them ever again?

How bad could it get?

Well, look at what he has done- without the consent of the governed- in his first term. If that does not give you nightmares about what he has planned for a second, nothing will.

Obama shelved in 2012.

The hot-mic remark was a fastball down the middle -- to demonstrate some pop in his bat -- and Romney hit a grounder to third.

If he's a left-handed batter, then yes. But if Romney bats right-handed I think it's more likely he hit a weak grounder to second. It's obvious he can't get around on the ball.

When Do We Hold Governors Responsible?

The more we learn about the Trayvon Martin killing, the more you have to wonder if the Governors all across our nation who passed this legislation in the first place should be put on trial. They basically gave a thumbs up to kill. The history since this law came into being is pretty sad.

Of course Jeb Bush will get a free ride, being Jeb Bush. What was he thinking? This has to be one of the most irresponsible pieces of legislation ever passed.

Zimmerman is not the only guilty party here, if he is found guilty that is. This legislation put our young people in tremendous jeopardy, by simply walking down the street.

Jeb Bush. He should be put on trial. How responsibly was this legislation carried out? Because as we are learning about this tragedy, we are learning that this was a shoot first, ask questions later kind of legislation. With no police. We are free to take the law into our own hands now. And kill.

And now a young man is dead. He had no weapon. He wasn’t stalking Zimmerman. He was in fact minding his own business until confronted. It’s what we all did when faced with this situation when we were young. We didn’t kill anybody.

We just defended ourselves when confronted by bullies. And got suspended from school. End of story.

Jeb Bush. Stupid stupid man. He is just as guilty as Zimmerman. A guest last night from Florida said not one citizen was demanding that this legislation be passed.

It was passed to pleased the NRA. Jeb Bush. Pathetic. Once again putting corporations before people.

I was happy to see Gov. Rendell (D) of PA would not sign this legislation. He was correct not to.

Feisty---here is what I didn't get about Zimmerman's lawyer walking off the interview set on Lawrence's show---why did he agree to appear in the first place? Did he find out minutes before the interview the kind of questions he would be asked (as opposed to the softballs he had been getting)? How could he not have known how Lawrence was likely to treat him?

By the way, Medvedev took this shot at Romney: "I would recommend all U.S. presidential candidates ... to do two things. First, when phrasing their position, one needs to use one's head, one's good reason, which would not do harm to a presidential candidate. Also, (one needs to) look at his watch: we are in 2012 and not the mid-1970s."

Who knew Russia supported Santorum! Must be alot of evangelicals there :)

Pat---good to see you back posting; hope all is well with you.

In addition to the governors of the states who signed these bills, as well as the legislatures who enacted them, I wonder where has the media been while these laws are being passed into law. I have the same questions about the laws impacting women's health and the anti-union laws. Up until last year we saw little coverage of these issues. If the people do not know what is going on in their legislatures, how can they make their feelings known to their representatives?

Well, as the Conservatives gleefully point a finger and gloat there are still some questions that remain...

1. Why did George Zimmerman ignore the 911 operator and continue to follow Trayvon Martin?

2. What started whatever confrontation occurred between Zimmerman and Martin?

(...and by the way, does anyone else find responding to fists with a gun justified?)

I'm all for the Justice Department and Special Prosecutor investigations into this case. I will admit to being sucked in to the outrage that Zimmerman was not arrested when the case first came to the media.

Now, I'm having my doubts.

Eyewitness accounts differ markedly from the early media accounts, raising questions about the professionalism of reporters who ran with the story before getting ALL the facts.

Anybody remember the Duke Lacrosse team?

This one has all the same earmarks. Shame on the media, once again.

How could he not have known how Lawrence was likely to treat him?

Steeler Fan,

After hearing Mr. Sonner's answers on other networks, it's apparent he isn't well versed in responding to the hard questions.

NO way would Larry O, toss marshmallows at him like the rest!

Steeler Fan, the media sold out when they fell in love with Ronald Reagan. We have a sort of return to 60 Minutes with MSNBC during prime time (as well as Martin Bashir) and we have some good journalists out there, but basically we see the same faces on FOX and CNN, who have nothing of value to add to our country by way of progress. I can remember a time long long ago when I actually liked Geraldo Rivera. What happend to him? I have no use for Republicans any longer. Those who came of age during the Reagan years haven't led on anything, they haven't fought for anything - they are more in the business of me, me, me.

Lawrence O'Donnell last night looked pained over what's going on. His father was a civil rights attorney so I think his is a voice we definitely need right now.

That's the point Noid. There are a LOT of questions that need to be answered. From both sides.

So why do you folks want to string Zimmerman up?

Those damn double standards keep biting you guys in the ass.

There are a LOT of questions that need to be answered.

Gee... I wonder why Zimmerman's attorney didn't take the opportunity afforded to him by Lawrence O'Donnell to do just that?

Up until last night, Mr. Sonner hasn't met a mic he could pass up...

Weird? No?

Why do Trayvon’s parents not supply us with a recent picture of him? Is there one besides the “gansta” pic on his Facebook account?

Who’s paying for Trayvon’s family attorney?

Why are the Black Panthers offering a bounty on Zimmerman? Does Eric Holders Justice Department not work properly?

Where are the Black Panthers getting their tens of thousands of dollars for a bounty on Zimmerman?

Why did Trayvon’s father first say Trayvon was suspended from school for 10 days because he was in a room he wasn’t supposed to be in and now it’s for a drug related incident?

Were the parents wrong when they said that was Trayvon’s voice in the 911 recording when it was actually Zimmerman?

Do we know if Zimmerman actually followed Trayvon or when he said “ok” to the 911 dispatcher, did Zimmerman stop pursuit and return to his truck?

Who attacked whom first? Does anyone know for a fact?

If this happened almost a month ago, why did it take so long for the “outrage”? (Quotes for Fake Outrage)

Is Al "Blueburrry Pie" Sharpton embarassed by drop-kicking Mom to RUN to the cameras?
Are the cameras Egghead's crack?

Today is the main event in the SC review of Barry’s ClunkerCare HCR. Yesterday, several justices, including liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg, called Barry’s lawyers out for arguing it’s NOT a tax for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act, but, showing up today arguing it IS a tax for purposes of the individual mandate. Only on Planet Liberal could something be a tax and not be a tax at the same time. Unfortunately for lefty liberals, even one of the liberal justices showed she doesn’t live on Planet Liberal for this case.

So, Barry’s lawyers may be stuck with the decision resting on Congresses Commerce Clause powers and they will have to overcome their awkward circular logic pointed out by the WSJ editorial page: Congress has the power to compel individuals to engage in commerce, which then gives the feds the power to regulate it under the Commerce Clause. Before the SC buys that nonsense, Barry’s lawyers better have a very good answer to the “broccoli question”:

If Congress can make everyone buy health insurance, what limits are there on its power to say mandate everyone buy and eat broccoli because it’s good for you, or pay a federal penalty?? Or mandate that everyone buy a Chevy Volt?? Or mandate that everyone buy solar panels for their homes?? It would appear that allowing the individual mandate under the Commerce Clause opens up a can of worms that has no end. I doubt even the liberal justices will want to open up that can. Especially, when Congress could have taken a more direct route to universal healthcare by imposing new taxes on everyone and mandating Medicare for everyone. Something that would definitely pass Constitutional scrutiny, and they just chose not to do so for political reasons.

After that, if you believe Zimmermans story (and you should because his side has pulled waaaaay out ahead in the trustworthy department)...

Never mind, of course, that the only person who can either provide the best confirmation or denial of the story is dead.

Michael, you're blaming the victim, a young man who was shot and killed. His life is over before it began. Go talk to Jeb Bush. It was he and Governors like him who gave the go ahead for Zimmerman to kill.

There is a great deal of blame to go around. We need to start at the top.

Of course, for you it's easier to just blame anyone but the party who in fact IS TO BLAME. It's call responsiblity. And being honest.

Try it sometime.

Um, Noid? There seem to be eyewitnesses to the event.

Their stories seem to lead in a different direction than the early media accounts. Kind of makes you wonder why no one bothered to get the facts BEFORE running with the story.

Pat, Boston, terrific post. There should be accountability for legislatures and governors who sign reckless legislation which allows any person to shoot first, ask questions later. Jeb Bush and every other legislature and Governor who signed these kinds of bills signed vigilante justice into law. There was no need for Stand Your Ground laws because existing laws already protected citizens defending themselves. The NRA and ALEC wanted these laws to fix a problem that did not exist. It has been reported that Bush at the time said the NRA helped get his brother elected, it was the least he could do to return the favor.

ALEC with the help of GOP legislators and Governors is also fixing a voter fraud problem that does not exist; when asked they cannot cite specific cases, there answer is just in case yet their goal is to disinfranchise the people's vote.

All people want is George Zimmerman arrested, investigated and brought to trial if warranted. If the roles were reversed in the Feb 26 shooting, if Trayvon Martin had followed Zimmerman after being told not to pursue, if an altercation took place, and if Trayvon had shot and killed Zimmerman, Trayvon would likely be sitting in a jail cell right now. The only thing protesters and supporters of Trayvon Martin want is equal treatment by the justice system.

Gee... I wonder why Zimmerman's attorney didn't take the opportunity afforded to him by Lawrence O'Donnell to do just that?

He probably saw O'Donnell's ratings and didn't want to waste his time with a show that draws about eight people that watch it.

Well noid, that's how these things usually go. Dead men can't speak. That's why we have investigations, witnesses, etc.

How about we let that play out before we start putting bounties out on the man's life.

Christ, Pat wants to put Jeb Bush in jail.

Have you folks lost your mind?

A half a dozen children have been shot in killed in Detroit in the first 3 months of 2012. Where is the outrage for that?

He probably saw O'Donnell's ratings and didn't want to waste his time with a show that draws about eight people that watch it.

Snuffy,

Tighten that feed bag of yours, you're slipping old gal...

It has been reported that Bush at the time said the NRA helped get his brother elected, it was the least he could do to return the favor.

Jody, this is horrible. The GOP is not looking out for any citizens in this country. They simply don't care about people. And their supporters are okay with that.

Jeb Bush. George W. Bush.

Sad.

Joe,

After reading the inane posts from the right on First Thought yesterday, I appreciate your post this am.

Yes , we both will need to hear the lawyers arguments today. The "broccoli question" will be addressed.

I am hopeful that the mandate will pass the courts test. More important will be tomorrow's arguments about Medicaid.

The goal as you stated is to provide universal heathcare. By bringing the uninsured into our insurance system will help begin to control heathcare cost.

And in the end we should all eat more vegetables.

Pat Boston MA.
Michael, you're blaming the victim

Normally I'd be all over that statement and agree with you, however, two things:

1 - If I came up to you and attacked you and you shot and killed me, in the United States of America, I AM NOT THE VICTIM - I am the thug.

2 - This story should teach EVERYONE a lesson about rushing to judgement and the dangers of MOB RULES.

For one week I felt horrible for Trayvon, until the facts started to trickle out. Now I have a ton of questions and when I see Al, Jesse and the Black Panthers on the same screen shot on my tv, I have even more questions because those three are known for their BS.

Did you all hear about this comment from Medvedev. I saw this over at The Obama Diary:

Romney got his butt handed to him over his fake outrage at President Obama’s hot mic

Medvedev took this shot at Romney: “I would recommend all U.S. presidential candidates … to do two things. First, when phrasing their position, one needs to use one’s head, one’s good reason, which would not do harm to a presidential candidate. Also, (one needs to) look at his watch: we are in 2012 and not the mid-1970s.”

************

Michael, we need to get rid of this legislation. Fast. I don't think many are siding with the Black Panthers on this one. I like Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al. They are activists who do something. Most people in this country do nothing but judge.

Um, Noid? There seem to be eyewitnesses to the event.

Um yea, who says they saw the start, saw the finish, but were not there for any of the actual events. No credibility, just like you.

The Trayvon Martin case is without a doubt a tragic loss of life, no matter how you view it. However, I think both sides of this argument need to wait for the facts to come out. There is no need for a mob mentality in going after George Zimmerman. Likewise, there is no need for people to trash Trayvon Martin's reputation either. Wait for the evidence to come out before labeling someone a racist vigilante or a street thug. That being said, the authorities should produce the evidence in a more timely fashion to defuse the current situation.

Dream on Bill in Fairfaux!!! If the Supreme's rule any part of ACA unconstitutional the Democrats will get to work on new solutions to address the problems concerning healthcare or lack thereof.

Contrast that with the Republicans solutions....oh that's right, THEY HAVE NO CREDIBLE SOLUTIONS to the healthcare crisis. They're ignoring that elephant in the room. Especially Romney.

Michael, I just saw a bus outside with players from the Utah Jazz who are in town to play the Boston Celtics. One of the players, so so young, was stepping onto the bus with a hoodie. It broke my heart.

What I learned from reading about Thurgood Marshall was that in order to move forward, you couldn't necessarily change people's minds, but you could change the laws. That's what made his work so damn important.

This Stand Your Ground legislation should be unacceptable to every person in this country. We need to protect our children, both yours and mine and everybody's, regardless of race and religion. Innocent people die. And it's always the young.

OK, I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong. I thought damaged went to get his Thorazine fix on Tuesday. Either I'm wrong, or they're going to have to dramatically up the dosage.

The reason that Zimmerman should have been charged is exactly this: that is how you find out WHAT happened, you sort it out in a court of law.

Here is the question that hasn't been asked or answered, and you all need to think about:

Given Florida's "Stand Your Ground" Law: at what point did that young man have the right to defend himself from a stranger, who had a gun, that was following him and challenging him? If you want to use that law to defend Zimmerman, you must also use it to defend Tryvaun. Or is the double standard coming from the Zimmerman apologists?

Pat Boston MA

I guess how the Governors look at such legislation depends on whether they are the side of the victims and think people need to be able to defend themselves as was always the unwritten law.

OR

Whether they are on the side of the criminals who have gotten far too many more rights from liberal thinking politicians than the victims whose suffering loses out to consideration of the criminals "bad lives".

Whether they are on the side of the criminals who have gotten far too many more rights from liberal thinking politicians than the victims whose suffering loses out to consideration of the criminals "bad lives".

Was not this case closed almost immediately? A young man is dead and no investigation? Zimmerman just walks away?

People believe liberals are to blame? Our prisons are full. Gov. Perry is carrying out the death penalty on people who quite possibly may have been innocent. And he doesn't show an ounce of regret.

Once again, GOP minions are confused by the rhetoric of GOP talking points on the mandate. Everyone WILL NOT have to buy health insurance as 98% of Americans will already have some sort of coverage. And, the majority of those who do not have coverage will not have to buy it either because of their income.

And please do tell me how this becomes a government takeover of your rights when it works perfectly well in Romneyville without the sky falling in on the rights of the good people of MA. And oh by the way, the good governor had a hand in crafting the health care bill the GOP now curses.

And by the way, regarding 'gun laws', the good people of Wisconsin were sold a gun bill during a special legislative session to promote 'job creation' that requires judges to immediately assume the innocence of anyone who kills someone in the 'defense' of their home. Plus, WI got 'concealed carry'. Another recipe for disaster from the GOP.

But wait, there's more. Wisconsin was dead last in 2011 for job creation. Wisconsin lost more jobs than any other state in 2011. Thank you Scott Walker.

RECALL SCOTT WALKER Wisconsin!

"For a thug punk? Nice try. The jig is up with the Al "Blueburrry Pie" Sharptons of the worlds.

NO MORE MOB RULES! Woot!

You and Obama's pot smoking son can't go around thuggin' and get sympathy.

Now Trayvon's mother is trademarking his name???? WTF?!....lol

Justice for our Justice System NOW!"

This makes me ill. You are requesting justice for the "law-enforcement" that did nothing when they came upon a scene in which the victim was totally unarmed and a kid. They may not notice much but I bet they noticed he was black. I don't think this case is entirely about race and I hate that the Black Panthers swoop in and illegitimize the case against this vigilante who decided to take someone's fate into his own hands. This man should be tried fairly, although he did not give his victim that courtesy.

Hey New Day. I'll play along.

Why hasn't Jon Corzine been charged?

Hey, WCA:

I'll play along...what does that have to do with this topic?

Or is that just your latest obsession?

Well NDD, you said this:

Zimmerman should have been charged is exactly this: that is how you find out WHAT happened, you sort it out in a court of law.

So can you either:

a) tell me why Corzine has not been charged

or

b) tell me why your statement has no merit

Cuz, see, your comment pretty much says it would be OK for the police to go out and round anyone they chose to up, charge them with a crime and then start looking into whether or not the people actually committed a crime.

Me? I think that might be problematic.

Here is the problem that you have WCA: and I am trying to think of how to reduce this down to the simplest thing possible, because honestly...you aren't able to take in complex information:

You are using YOUR ethics to judge mine. In other words, in the happy WCA world, the only people that should be charged are those who might be (gasp!) LIBERAL!

Now, if you can show me where Corizine pulled a gun and shot an unarmed man, I will be happy to agree with you that he should be charged.

False equivelent, WCA...ever heard the term?

Nah NDD, you missed the point. Corzine was an easy pigeon. someone you could relate to. Could have been anyone. See people don't get charged until the police think they have enough to convict them in the real world.

So tell me are you for rounding people up and charging them without knowing all the facts?

Cause it sounds like you are.

WCA,

Cuz, see, your comment pretty much says it would be OK for the police to go out and round anyone they chose to up, charge them with a crime and then start looking into whether or not the people actually committed a crime.

Why don't you simply stay on topic--this is about the death of Travyon Martin, not Jon Corzine--no matter how much you would like to change the subject.

And newday's comment does not "pretty much says (sic) it would be OK for the police to go out and round anyone they chose to up"--no matter how much you might like to believe that.

So tell me are you for rounding people up and charging them without knowing all the facts?

The fact is, mister, Zimmerman shot an unarmed man. He admits that he killed someone. The "facts" are in dispute, and he should be booked and fingerprinted by the police, just as anyone else in his situation would be.

Didn't your mother ever tell you that if you don't have anything intelligent to say, don't say it? If not, she should have.

Yep, Jack, a pretty amazing leap of logic by our friend WCA.

Spike Lee performed a valuable public service over the weekend by tweeting Zimmerman's home address.

Now to what end do you suppose he would do something like that?

Psst - WCA: Clearly NewDay just doesn't understand.

Or perhaps just doesn't want to. Either way, She was all over Jared Laughtner on the days after it happened, jumping up and down and screaming that he was a right wing extremist and it was all Palin's fault.

Little Mr. Martin - the 6'-2" hero of the libbies is a disaster, and it's getting worse, al la Crystal Gail Martin.

But Id loove to hear our libbie friends address Martin's tweets. Heck, I'll settle for an explanation of his screen name [maybe he just mis-spelled NAACP?] Golly, but I bet old Al Sharpton would be a tad pissed if Rush called Treyvon by his screen name.

Oh and a gun is a fantastic antidote to fists. Just ask any female rape victim. See my silly little libbie friends - a gun is a tool. A gun can level the playing field. Not every one is 6'-2", 185. And remember when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

Alrighty then, back to work. Just a couple weeks until the real fun starts - a big old trial.

newday,

a pretty amazing leap of logic by our friend WCA

You and I agree about almost everything, but I would have to take exception to a couple of words.

"logic". Didn't see any in his post.

"our friend". That is terribly generous of you.

Probable cause (of death or you know, crime): gun in the hand of one man, a 17 year young man dead from gunshot wound. It's a head scratcher.

Cops told Zimmerman to stop pursuing Treyvon. Zimmerman ignored the advice and provoked an altercation. Zimmerman kills Treyvon.

It can't be called self defense when YOU provoke the altercation.

What moral authority does Zimmerman have to question someone for walking down a street in a supposedly free country AND just because you are getting the $hit kicked out of you gives you NO RIGHT to use a gun. Imagine if we were all allowed to provoke an altercation and then kill the person with a gun and get away with it? What the hell is wrong with people who are defending this murderer? As far as the people threatening him now....what goes around comes around.

Hi, Jack. When all else fails, fool them with kindness. Actually, I kind of have to agree with one part of what WCA said:

He is right...I often believe that when a man is standing over a dead body with a smoking gun, and he had just been told by police dispatch not to follow the victim, kind of thinking some charges should have been made.

At least some effort at investigation would have happened.

My two cents worth:

1. On Trayvon Martin. The police involved made a decision to not make an arrest based on the evidence they had. As all-knowing as the blogosphere is, we were not there, we don't know all of the evidence the police had at the scene at the time. They will continue to investigate. The state's attorney is convening a grand jury to investigate.

The non-arrest of Zimmerman is not something that can't be changed, if the evidence warrants such a change. However, if Zimmerman had been arrested, that is a bell which can't be unrung.

It is very difficult to say what actually happend between Zimmerman and Martin, i.e. who struck who first. There were only two participants in the events, and one of them is unable to testify. The police will not release all of the information they have, that would devalue the evidence.

The information on Martin being suspended for having drugs was just another journalist throwing out what they find out. Same thing with Zimmerman having prior confrontations with police. In both cases, there is no conspiracy to make one side or the other look bad. The journalists are just doing there job, gathering information and putting it out. In the 24/7 be on top news cycle, bits and pieces of stories get out before everything is known. That's the reality of the world we live in.

I would say that what may very well happen is that the Feds may take this as a case on which they decide to say that the right of a person to be ALIVE trumps the rights of gun owners. Whether they decide to take the case will depend on what evidence is available. The FEDS won't want to take a case which, if it has a strong possibility of them losing, would further the "shoot first, questions later" situation many of the "stand your ground" laws have taken.

As to Geraldo's comment on hoodies, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my entire life. A once respected journalist is actually blaming the death of this teenager on a piece of clothing.

2. On the ACA or Obamacare as everyone wants to call it. I don't know how the SCOTUS will rule. I think they are likely to uphold the law, in its entirety. They will likely carve out a special exception or some type of differentiation of health care from broccoli or Chevy volts. As to the Medicaid expansion, if the rest of the law is upheld, this part is a "gimme". The states always have the option to not participate in Medicaid.

3. On the open mike issue: interesting how the Russian used the situation to give a nice shot across the bow to the Republicans. His diplomatic way of saying, "This is the real world, I don't trust you, you are idiots who don't know what you're talking about." Funny how even leaders of other countries know the Republicans do not have someone who is ready to be the leader of the free world running for their nominee.

newday,

Agreed. This is such a no-brainer that I can't understand why anyone would not. . . oh. . . wait a minute. . . no-brainer. Okay, I think I understand now.

The mandate will 'break the bank' for tens of millions of Americans. What about the millions who make a thousand dollars a month, who are mandated with an $800 bill or a $400 fine. Where are these people going to get that money? Their cars are parked, they are walking. Are the 65,000 additional IRS agents going to find these people on the sidewalks and beat them with a stick?

Jack: I think you just made the final point in the best way possible.

As the story develops it sounds like the sheriff was right to not arrest Zimmerman now and forward the case on to their local attorneys for further review. If Zimmerman has a broken nose and other scuffs one could argue he was defending himself. It's good to see authorities make commonsense decisions instead of jumping to conclusions and suggesting that some acted "Stupidly"......

to the moron above who is trying to feign 'surprise' at the 'recent' concern about Trayvon Martin,...

The amping up of the case is because the 911 tapes were released. Those tapes seem to tell a completely different story than the one Mr. Innocent-Zimmerman would have portrayed.

At the BARE minimum,...they reveal a completely BOTCHED Police Investigation that WASN'T - and for MANY Americans,...that is an OUTRAGE.

Of course,...the body was in the morgue for three days, further delaying the opportunity for outrage - oh and the only person tested is the deceased. Zimmerman, as the aggressor, committed murder and LITERALLY walked away.

UAW, I couldn't disagree with you more. A bare minimum standard of protocol would test the owner of the smoking gun, verify his background and his right to conceal and carry. Not just question him at the scene and accept his version unqualified. Bogus,...

Here's my final point on this outrage:

In many cities across this country, an on-duty policeman in the same situation would be relieved of his weapon and placed on administrative leave while an investigation took place. To my knowledge, the police did not follow the same procedure with a vigilante until it became a news item.

This particular message board isn't about the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman situation.

But, since some of you have chosen to post here about that very tragic circumstance, I would also like to weigh in.

First off, the mainstream media wasn't forthcoming with all of the details in the beginning. They made it seem like Zimmerman shot Martin simply because he was a strange black youth, walking in a gated neighborhood, wearing a hoodie.

But, as of yesterday more details about this incident would seem to indicate that is not the case.

As was reported yesterday on MSNBC, Trayvon Martin punched Zimmerman in the face causing his nose to bleed and his lip to swell. He also beat Zimmerman's head against the sidewalk repeatedly, per the account of at least one eyewitness. It was Zimmerman, and not Trayvon Martin (as was first reported), who was crying and screaming for help while Martin was viciously beating him up.

So it would appear that Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin because he never saw him before in the neighborhood. He called 911 and reported his suspicions to the police. He then had some sort of verbal contact with Martin. We know this because an eyewitness stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating him, while Zimmerman was lying on the ground.

The fact that the police told Zimmerman not to stop or approach Martin, was not a license for Martin to beat Zimmerman's head against the sidewalk. Martin had a phone. We know this because he was talking to his girlfriend on it at some point during the incident. All he head to do was tell Zimmerman that he was on his way to his father's house in the complex. Then, if he felt he as being harassed; he could have called the police, instead of beating up on Zimmerman.

It would appear from all accounts (and this is key) that Zimmerman did not brandish a weapon until after Martin started to beat him up. Florida law permits people to defend themselves under such circumstances.

I ask people in my neighborhood who they, are all the time, if I don't know them. I don't care what color they are or what type of jacket they are wearing. My neighbors pretty much do the same thing. That doesn't give anyone the right to start beating on us.

Also, why was there so much exposure of Zimmerman's past when the news of this incident first came out, and absolutely nothing about Trayvon Martin? The photos of Martin made him out to be a slender, slightly built kid.

But, (and I have no way to verify this, other than word of mouth) I heard since that he is 6"4' tall, and weighs somewhere around 200lbs. That would make him capable of physically hurting Zimmerman.

Additionally, we heard so much about Zimmerman's run in with police on a prior occasion.

But, we didn't hear anything about the fact that Trayvon Martin was suspended from school for two full weeks, because he was in possession of a baggie with marijuana residue in it. Two full weeks is a pretty substantial suspension.

Also, what's this business I hear about the New Black Panther Party putting out a $10,000.00 bounty to locate George Zimmerman's whereabouts? What's up with that? Is that reasonable, or even legal?

It seems to me there an awful lot of people here who want to "lynch" George Zimmerman, without even hearing all of the facts first; and, I have to ask myself why that is.

I also have to ask why the news media didn't make all of these details available until just yesterday.

Oh, and there is one last thing; there was a report yesterday, that Trayvon Martin's parents are applying for a "copyright" on his name, and his photo image. I undertsnd they are under a tremendous amount of emotional pain, and perhaps they aren't thinking right at this time.

But, what the hell is that all about?

I simply just do not understand the reaction to the Martin case. It amazes me the comments I read here. As I have said before these "new facts" came out, it does not matter who struck first. Zimmerman was following Trayvon even if he decided to "stand his ground" the idead Zimmerman was following him lead to that incident.

Given the police had records of telling Zimmerman not to pursue, an order which he a volunteer neighborhood watchmen, decided not to follow and that Trayvon was indeed unarmed I don't understand how Zimmermand was not arrested. I am not implying he is guilty here either.

Though many of the things bother me in this case, and given biases I will probably jump to certain conclusions faster than others, the only true "outrage" I have is the lack of arrest. From what has been stated nothing has change regarding that. The only thing it appears from comments I have read above that is the perception Trayvon. What you think of his character does not change the idea that Zimmerman, an adult, started stalking an unarmed boy when he was told not to and had no reason to pursue.

Also to respond to the trademarking his name. Would you want others to try and profit off of the death of your son? I would not. It would disgust me if other people used such a tragic even to try and make a profit. It is probably for this reason the family did such a thing. I have already seen an attempt where someone was holding an event (with no conncetion to the family) using Trayvon's name.

Good job NDD and Jack. Whe you have no basis to argue, find a buddy and start the name calling. Is that the strategy you guys work oin the Tree House?

You people are so easy to beat at this, it's not really that fun anymore.

Kind of sad, really.

All one has to do is use your own words against you.

It may be helpful to a Supreme Court decision on health care if each member of the Supreme Court would make a three (3) hour visit to the wealthy hospitals and the poor hospitals in the DC area before making any decision on this issue. They should make at least a 15 minute visit in each of the wards of the hospital.

What a great idea but this would never - never happen when they know their hands are tied by the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Pat Boston MA.

"..........Michael, you're blaming the victim, a young man who was shot and killed. His life is over before it began. Go talk to Jeb Bush. It was he and Governors like him who gave the go ahead for Zimmerman to kill .........."

Pat, at least one eyewitness saw Trayvon Martin beat George Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk.

When the police told Zimmerman not to stop Martin, it was not a license for Martin to beat the crap out of him. Martin had a cell phone, and could have called the police, just like Zimmerman did.

It's a shame you think one person should be able to beat someone up, and that the person getting beat up shouldn't be allowed to defend himself.

It makes me wonder what your opinion would be if the roles were reversed.

I don't like vigilantism at all.

But, I will say that I do ask people I don't know, what they're doing in my neighborhood if they get close enough for me to talk to them. My neighbors all do the same thing too. That doesn't give anyone the right to beat us up for asking.

Florida's stand your ground law, was/is intended to allow people to defend themselves. As far as we can see in this case, all Zimmerman did was to ask Martin why he was in the neighborhood, and Martin reacted with anger.

So much so, that he began assaulting Zimmerman, drawing blood from the latter's nose, lip(s), and from the back of his head. The eyewitness to the assault said it was not Martin, but rather Zimmerman who was pleading for help while he lay on the ground being pummeled by Martin.

The question I have here is this; (keeping in mind that the police did not issue Martin a license to beat the hell out of Zimmerman when they told him not to approach) why was it okay for Martin to strike Zimmerman in the face, and to bang his head against the sidewalk?

But not, for Zimmerman to do something to protect himself?

Akeem, New Jersey

"..........I simply just do not understand the reaction to the Martin case. It amazes me the comments I read here. As I have said before these "new facts" came out, it does not matter who struck first. Zimmerman was following Trayvon even if he decided to "stand his ground" the idead Zimmerman was following him lead to that incident. .........."

Likewise, Akeem, I do not understand how anyone could reasonably say that it doesn't matter who struck first! That presupposes the police gave Trayvon Martin a license to pummel Zimmerman when they told him not to approach the boy. We all know that is not the case.

Zimmerman may have shown poor judgement by stopping and/or approaching Trayvon Martin.

But that doesn't mean Zimmerman deserved to have his head repeatedly slammed into the sidewalk by Martin , as one eywitness described to the police.

Also, what about the character assassination in the media, of Zimmerman that took place during the first 48 hours or so of the reporting of this incident; while there was no mention of the fact that Trayvon Martin was suspended from school for possession of a plastic bag with marijuana residue on it.?

Akeem, New Jersey

"..........Also to respond to the trademarking his name. Would you want others to try and profit off of the death of your son? I would not. It would disgust me if other people used such a tragic even to try and make a profit. It is probably for this reason the family did such a thing. I have already seen an attempt where someone was holding an event (with no conncetion to the family) using Trayvon's name.........."

Yeah but, WHO was/is using Travyvon Marrtin's name to make money? Did the family give Al Sharpton (for instance) permission to do it?

All I can say is, if my son or daughter was shot and killed, the very last thing I would think of doing, would be to block someone else from making money off of their death. My focus would be on my own grief for losing them, and the grief of my family and friends.

I'm not saying that the Martin's aren't sad and grieving the loss of their boy.

But, I just can't understand how they would think of something like that, at a time like this.

J merle seriously? You just invented a story there

"But, I will say that I do ask people I don't know, what they're doing in my neighborhood if they get close enough for me to talk to them. My neighbors all do the same thing too. That doesn't give anyone the right to beat us up for asking.

Florida's stand your ground law, was/is intended to allow people to defend themselves. As far as we can see in this case, all Zimmerman did was to ask Martin why he was in the neighborhood, and Martin reacted with anger."

There is no certainty that is what happened but you speak as if we all watched. Those are opinons of yours based on your perception of the two people. Zimmerman is a different person than you. Is it wrong to be fearful being approached and followed in the middle of a night in an area one didn't know by some random person(Zimmerman did have his weapon but I have no idea whether this was seen by Trayvon).?In that situation if you were truly afraid for your life would you not be allowed to defend yourself on the same grounds with which you present Zimmerman?

The same option you provided Trayvon with, letting the authorities was handed to Zimmerman which he willingly denied. That is what put made him come in contact with Trayvon, Trayvon recieved no such option as Zimmerman approached him. Then you try to compare dfending yourself with punches thrown to that of a bullet through the chest with a gun? I am not sure if you read what you are sayying?

I do not know all the details and have no certainty of what happened

“Today, Gov. Romney said that Russia is without question our nation’s number one geopolitical foe..."

Maybe he visited Sarah Palin and could see Russia from her porch. In other words, Romney is almost as clueless as Palin (and Perry, and heck they are all clueless). And this conclusion is being drawn from multiple foreign policy statements Romney has made -- And the goes for Santorum too -- neither knew what they were talking about when questioned about Afghanistan for example.

About the Trayvon Martin situation -- I'm probably going to catch hell for this, but my main concern is the NRA's power to make laws in this country, most of which are to increase profits for the gun industry. And Teapublican use of tools like ALEC to pass said laws nationwide. This is the root of all evil.

With that said, I feel Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson could be of more use to the black community by addressing the root of the problems faced by young black males in this country. Look at statistics about crimes committed per percent of population, look at the number of single mothers per percent of population, look at poverty, educational achievement, etc.

The black community would do well to drop the modern jive talk (it isn't "ax," it is "ask"), and I'm guilty too saying "whadup" the other day to management, or those with a lot of tattoos/piercing... And sorry, but it is well known that the criminal element out there use hoodies to hide their identity, so don't try to make this some kind of positive trait when it's not. No one is "pure as the driven snow" so everyone needs to own up regarding the problems our nation faces.

It's good to see pressure to get a proper investigation in this case. The haves versus the have nots, and why the shooting of a black youthwas not investigated is the issue. But whether the story deserves the amount or length of news cycle and the protests, the Occupy rallies are far more meaningful, not only to Trayvon but to all of the have nots.

Just love reading the crazies on this post who are all for calling Trayvon the aggressor because he was suspended from school for a baggie that had pot residue; the fact that he was 6' tall and 140 lbs - even though Zimmerman outweighed him by a lot, etc. No one seems to be bothered that Zimmerman was arrested for assaulting a police officer in the past. Plus, he was told NOT to follow Trayvon yet chose to anyway. The worst part of all of this is the injustice - no matter how the investigation turns out. Zimmerman should have had his gun taken from him (it wasn't); should have been tested for drugs and alcohol (he wasn't); and a full investigation done. This was shoddy at best. The fact that this idiot is still out there with a gun within his reach should scare everyone. Florida just got marked off my vacation destinations for a long time. What is it with Florida, Arizona and Texas that just makes the people there stupid????

J. Merle Stanley - what you are reporting are the facts according to Zimmerman. Unfortunately, Trayvon isn't around to give his side of everything. Zimmerman made sure he wasn't.

Tradmarking his name and a specific statement about him prevent others from making money off his death.

JoAnna Smith - as usual - open mouth insert foot (or are you at the point where you're just moving from one foot to the other). Not only did President Obama call for a strong investigation but your favorites Romney and Santorum did too (after it became apparent that this was a news story). Kinda makes you look - oh well - we all know how it makes you look!

Akeem..........I didn't say I saw anything of what happened between Martin & Zimmerman.

But, AN EYEWITNESS DID, and that's pretty much the account he gave to police.

I still don't get how or why you think it's okay for Martin to start beating on Zimmerman, for following him. I don't know if you read what you wrote. Because, If I was scared of someone following me, I wouldn't go towards them, and start smashing their head into the pavement. I would run away from them.

Stand your ground means you fight back when you are attacked. It doesn't mean that you start the attack, and then say that you were "scared" afterwards.

Martin is the one who put hands on Zimmerman first. He punched his face, and smashed his head into the sidewalk.

I just don't get how someone could say that it was justified for Martin to put hands on Zimmerman, and that Zimmerman shouldn't fight back. Zimmerman didn't touch Martin. All he did was SAY something to him.

You don't have the right to beat hell out of someone for SAYING something to you....its WORDS vs actions.

There were conflicting eyewitness reports. One woman said Trayvon was screaming for help - then was corrected by the police to say it was Zimmerman. We won't know what actually happened because Zimmerman made sure Trayvon couldn't tell anyone. We don't know that Zimmerman wasn't the attacker. My guess is he was since he was the aggressor from the beginning!

Typical day at newsvine.

The "liberals" cutting and pasting from HuffPo.

Just so you know, If I wanted to read Huffpo, I would be at Huffpo reading.

Next, the deflection..... Treyvon Martin!

Just so you know, if you want to talk about that, there are plenty of threads about it. Why clutter up this one with it?

Lols at Jack in Portsmouth - "Why don't you simply stay on topic--this is about the death of Travyon Martin, not Jon Corzine--no matter how much you would like to change the subject."

I'm sorry, I reread the article a few times. NO MENTION of Treyvon Martin.

The healthcare issue before the SCOTUS. That's what the article is about. There is also some mention of other political stuff, like Romney's "over reaction" to The Presiden't gaffe. But no Treyvon Martin.

So the healthcare act...

The Presidents Lawer: It's a Tax!

The same Presidents Lawyer: It's NOT a Tax!

The SCOTUS: Hahahahahahaha!

Yeah, it's not looking too good for Mr. Constitutional Scholar. He obviously wasn't a very GOOD Constitutional Scholar, or he would know better than to try to base his administrations success on an unconstitutional law. And Kagan? She sits on the SCOTUS to decide the constitutionality of things. And yet, the law she helped write may in fact be unconstitutional! Doesn't speak very highly of her qualifications to be a SCOTUS Justice, does it?

Of course, Mr Constitutional scholar never let a silly little thing like The Constitution get in his way, now did he?

Like his appointee Holder issuing a legal opinion that The President deciding to asassinate you constitutes due process.

WTF is with you so called "liberals" anyways? You guys like war now? You all in favor of more war, more dead soldiers, more killing? You people claiming to be liberal and supporting Obama's WARS make me sick.

The President, Barack Obama, AS cOMMANDER IN cHIEF, could order the troops home ANY TIME HE WANTS TO!!!!!!

I had to register as a Republican - A REPUBLICAN! - to support a Presidential candidate who will actually stop the endless cycle of wars.

There is a candidate who will bring the troops home NOW! There is a candidate who will end the wars NOW!

That candidate does better in the polls against Obama than any other candidate.

Republicans, want to get Obama out? Want to win against Obama?

Democrats, want to stop the killing, the body bags, the endless wars and all of thier Ugliness?

Vote Ron Paul 2012.

Or keep the endless flow of our nations youth flowing, overseas by plane or boat

And home in a body bag.

Alil Common Sense - first and foremost - your post indicated NO common sense. Anyone with even a modicum of a brain - I'm hoping you'll qualify - knows that Ron Paul has no chance of being President. Not one; not even if hell freezes over twice. He's not going to be President. And, if you're so totally lacking in common sense that you'd vote for either Romney or Santorum - well then you're beyond hopeless!

Ahhhhh. You claim my post has no common sense, but you issue no statement of substance, no cognizant argument to back up your statement.

It's ok, I'm used to that from you.

Next you state Ron Paul has no chance.

Again, you offer no cognizant reason why you feel that way.

Why do you feel that way? On what do you base this opinion you so vehemently espouse? Obviously you feel strongly about it. Based on what?

Third sentence - I would vote for Romney or Santorum?

Really not sure what makes you think I would vote for either one of them. Or Grinch.

Santorum and Grinch are pieces of feces.

So is RObamaney (They are essentially the same person, with the same policies, and the same Wall Street donors)

Last election, I wrote in the candidate I felt was best for the country - Hilary Clinton.

This election I will write in the candidate I feel is best for the country - Ron Paul.

Maybe you don't understand the election cycle well enough to see through the lies of the mainstream media, both left AND right.

Voters DON'T elect Presidents.

Voters elect Delegates.

Delegates elect Presidents.

Just as an FYI, the delegate counts reported in the mainstream media have very little basis in reality. First, the mainstream media is reporting delegates for Romney and Santorum, definitely, and probably Grinch as well, who are NOT comitted to those candidates. For another thing, BOTH parties are corrupt as hell. They FEAR an honest man. That means that here in Massachussetts, for example, in order to win a delegate spot, you have to claim to be a Romney supporter. If you openly declare your support for Ron Paul, you will be stonewalled at the caucus. The chair will refuse to accept or even notice your nomination from the floor, and if you get past that, you will mysteriously get less votes than you really did at the hand count. (IE; you have 30 friends and family at the caucus who came with you to support you... but you mysteriously only get 7 votes)

If you are selected as a delegate, and they discover you are a Ron Paul supporter, you will be "purged"... de-selected in a secret republican "court". You will not be allowed to attend, you will not be allowed to defend yourself, you will not even be notified until after the fact.

Still, we are getting through. On April 28th, we will elect delegates. We are running strong slates in all of the congressional districts, and in districts 6 and 7 we even have enough people attending that our delegates will be able to run openly as Ron Paul supporters. In district 8 Romney's supporters have already approached us about a deal. Negotiations are ongoing.

Many Ron Paul supporters are former dems or indies who are not party blind. That's why we have such strong support among dems and indies... open eyes and minds. Objectivity breeds good decision making. Many posters here really need to give it a try.

Or vote for Obama, and vote for WAR with Iran, continuing conflict in Somalia, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, and Iraq. Vote for a man who says that his own decision to asassinate you constitutes "due process" per The Constitution. Vote for a man who signed the patriot act and the NDAA. Vote for a man who continues and expands the Wars, even though it is in his power to end it all with a simple phone call that he apparently can't be bothered to make.

My questions to you, seeking, earlier in this post, are not rhetorical. I am interested in the answers.

Also, apologies to Jack for singling you out, you were only doing the same thing as many others, I just found your wording ironic.

Damage, you know your boy Zimmerman has a record as well right? He was arrested once for using violence on an officer, twice for disobeying police instructions (I do not see how this could possible be relevant to Martin;s case /s), and arrested again for domestic violence.

Problem with all this is, and was, the inaction of the police. The killing was what?,9 or 10 days old before anyone of authority even began talking about an investigation. All the various evidentiary components particular to a fresh such scene, are now gone, uninterpretable, or contaminated to the extent, little, if any could be used in a court of law. It will, in all likelihood, end up being one side against another. This police department is one sorry gang of pricks. Meanwhile, the life of a 17 year old has passed from among us. Sigh. Lunacy everywhere.

Alil Common Sense-

You forgot "Want to abolish the Federal Reserve, return to the gold standard and repeal the Civil Rights Act?"

Ash, yeah, because the CRA has ushered in a new age of peace and prosperity for minorities, right?

And The Fed is good for you, right?

And issuing money based on future debt from me and you, well that's totally sane, right?

On The Ryan Budget

Donald Trump on the Paul Ryan budget: Republicans have a plan, but it’s not a choice that the Republicans are going to win. People are going to take the choice that’s best for them even if it’s not best for the country. I think it’s a very dangerous plan for Mitt Romney. He’s going to be saddled with a plan that’s very tough to live with.

Father Thomas Kelly, a Catholic priest and constituent of Ryan’s, felt similarly: “As a constituent of Congressman Ryan and a Catholic priest, I’m disappointed by his cruel budget plan and outraged that he defends it on moral grounds. Ryan is Catholic, and he knows that justice for the poor and economic fairness are core elements of our church’s social teaching. It’s shameful that he disregarded these principles in his budget.”

Why the individual mandate holds the key to health-care reform

By Editorial Board, Published: March 26The Washington Post

WHILE POLICY considerations will infuse the Supreme Court arguments Tuesday about the health-care mandate, the session will focus on this legal question: Does the Constitution give Congress the power to order all individuals above a certain income level to buy health insurance? This is the topic of the Supreme Court’s second of three days of consideration of the health-care reform act.

Twenty-six states, the National Federation of Independent Business and several individuals argue that Congress has overreached. To them, the mandate represents a top-down, big-government imperative that threatens liberty. They acknowledge that the Constitution gives Congress robust powers to regulate interstate commerce and the individuals and companies involved in such commerce. But they argue that Congress cannot force individuals to make a purchase from a private company in the marketplace.

“[I]f Congress has the power not just to regulate commercial suppliers and those who voluntarily enter the market, but to compel demand as well, then we have truly entered a brave new world,” the states argue in a court filing. And if the Supreme Court blesses such a move, they say, there will be nothing to stop Congress from mandating purchases of everything from automobiles to vegetables. The mandate is “as unbounded as it is unprecedented.”

These are serious arguments. But we believe the government has the better of the policy and legal case for why the individual mandate is necessary and constitutional.

Health-care services account for some 17 percent of the country’s gross domestic product; today, the average family pays an additional $1,000 annually in the form of higher premiums to subsidize the costs incurred by those who receive care but do not carry insurance. The mandate is an indispensable tool for achieving the government’s compelling goals of universal coverage and lower costs. Insurance companies would be unable to offer affordable coverage to those with preexisting conditions, for example, unless they also were guaranteed enrollment of the young and healthy customers who are less likely to consume health-care services.

In the recent past, the Supreme Court has struck down attempts by Congress to use the Constitution’s Commerce Clause to promulgate laws that had no connection to commercial activity, including those involving guns near schools and violence against women. Yet it has upheld Congress’s Commerce Clause power to reach individuals who were not obviously involved in commercial activity — most famously, the Depression-era farmer who grew wheat for his own consumption. The court concluded that his decision to grow — rather than purchase — wheat interfered with the government’s ability to regulate wheat prices.

The same logic should hold true for individuals able but unwilling to buy health insurance: Their absence has a significant impact on the market, especially because it is virtually inevitable that they will need health-care services at some point in their lives.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-the-individual-mandate-matters-so-much/2012/03/23/gIQA8zCacS_story.html?hpid=z2

__________________________________________________

Well since we are having this discussion today the Court has decided that the Affordable Health Act doesn’t satisfy the requirements of the Anti –Injunction Act. In other words it isn’t a tax exactly. This question could come up again in the future when they have actually started charging the fee although the argument is severely weakened by the decision.

I feel compelled to point out to you’ll Yahoo’s that this is the only clause that Virginia Attorney General Cucinelli won in his stacked deck with Harry Hudson. So it was pretty smart of the twenty-six states not to buy into his court case. Take your little bag of marbles on home Cootch before you embarrass yourself or the State of Virginia any further.

Now just like yesterday let’s keep our arguments down to the facts of the Mandate. These are separate issues you know and they have to stand or fall on their own.

Thanks for sharing the post, IR. Another feature of the Commerce Clause was its use in the civil rights fight. Restaurants which refused to serve African-Americans were interfering with interstate commerce as food and supplies were transported on interstate highways. Seems to me that the healthcare industry representing such a big portion of our entire economy impacts interstate commerce as well.

IR -- The WaPO editorial is as refreshing as the sun. Thanks for posting it here.

It may be helpful to a Supreme Court decision on health care if each member of the Supreme Court would make a three (3) hour visit to the wealthy hospitals and the poor hospitals in the DC area before making any decision on this issue. They should make at least a 15 minute visit in each of the wards of the hospital.

What a great idea but this would never - never happen when they know their hands are tied by the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Fosz: on this case, IMO the Court will decide on the merits, and the law, in its entirety, will be upheld.

The alternative is that we will see the Supreme Court mandated reduction of the ability of the Federal government to act. Most of the government regulation in the 20th Century, stem from Congresses power to regulate commerce and to tax. FAA, FCC, EPA, HUD, FHA, NASA and much more stem from the commerce clause directly or indirectly.

The justices are no longer beholden to the party. Most were chosen because of their idealogical leanings on certain social issues. In many actual cases, the eventual outcomes can't be predicted because the situation was not conceived when the justices were appointed. Other than Sotomeyor, none of the justices could have anticipated this case.

How is the government going to pay for this health care program? Since most of the tobacco smoker have died off now and fewer and fewer people smoke now how are we going to pay for this health care program?

Since obesity is a much greater threat to the health care system now - their must be some way of taxing the great obesity problem on the health care system today.

The only way this could be done is every time a person renews their driver's license is to have them weight in. For every pound over weight they will be required to pay the tax IAW there height and age have them pay for this burden to the health care system. Or,

Everytime they make it to the doctor's office for any reason they must be weighted in.

Everyone would pay a pound for pound tax on their obesity.

Every REPUBLICAN CONGRESS member should run with this.

Welcome to the Socialist States of America

Liberals are deranged people. Look at their comments about Zimmerman's lawyer earlier in the thread.

They don't have the ability to recognize the difference between legitimate questions and loaded questions. But when they are held to the standard they push upon others, they're the first to crack and flip the hell out.

On Obamacare, they want to shred the Constitution. Watch where these judges vote on this and you'll see how far some people are willing to go to destroy our freedoms and impose government controls on us.

Obama-Biden 2012 - The road to the continuing decline of America

The REPUBLICAN CONGRESS needs some means of paying for the burden of health care. Since most of the smokers have died off now - the only way the government is going to make up for the lost of this take revenue is to tax the people for their obesity.

John, Tucson - oh yeah 'cause the GOP candidates have such solid plans for the country. Oh wait - they don't seem to have ANY plans.

Uh, Amy?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/romney-and-the-individual-mandate-again/2012/03/20/gIQAhB1RSS_blog.html?wprss=rss_fact-checker

It's the second time the WaPo has debunked this.

You comfortable with lying about someone's record? Manipulating video clips? Chopping up quotes?

No Joe---of course Amy wouldn't be comfortable lying about someone's record, manipulating video clips or chopping up quotes---that is your job and nobody does it better.

that is your job and nobody does it better.

SF,

If that's NOT the truth!

Clean up @ Feisty's house! LMAO!

Oh, I dunno, Steeler. Love can make you do crazy things- and Amy has it, bad, for Obama.

Then, too, she has no problems making fun of someone's blindness, so, to me, that suggests all bets are off.

Amy, the Heritage Foundation, Bob Dole and most of the GOP caucus in 1993 were cheering the "individual mandate". Romney, after passing his Massachusetts plan, wrote on op ed saying the federal government should adopt the mandate nationwide. While President Obama was not a supporter of it during the 2008 campaign, he at least explained why and how he was persuaded to accept the "individual mandate" as part of the ACA. These republicans are simply against it because President Obama supported it. They are the true hypocrites on this issue. There are clips of Iowa GOPer Senator Chuck Grassley declaring that the "individual mandate" was a necessary component of health care reform, he helped add it to ACA; right after Pres Obama said he had been convinced of the merits by republicans and democrats, Grassley came out and said he thought it unconstitutional.

Cheers for that one, Steeler Fan!

Jody, you are one great source of knowledge and a fluent writer, to boot. You add substance to every discussion, thanks for the info.

nojo, I followed your link. It does nothing to debunk the fact the individual mandate was a Republican idea, and Romney's contribution to the MAssachusettes law.

Romney answered indirectly, saying “I think my plan is a good plan that should be adopted by other states — ”

Gibson cut him off, asking again whether the former governor would support a federal mandate. Romney responded, “I would not mandate at the federal level that every state do what we do.”

Amy, how do you explain Obama during the 08 campaign being AGAINST it? But, now, he's for it. It goes with his "this isn't a tax" but now in court they want to call it a tax. It also goes with him fronting he's being tough with Russia but we get him whispering with a Russian official saying he'd have "more flexibility" after the election. And, we're supposed to trust this man?

dirt-303814

The individual mandate was a compromise to get Republicans to support healthcare reform. If Democrats had their druthers, we would have Universal Health Care, as in, the private insurance companies would be out of business.

I trust Obama because he has delivered: Osama is dead, Qaddafy is dead (America's number one enemyy before Osama), Mubarak is gone and the Arab countries took responsibility for getting rid of these dictators, Obama finagled that without committing our troops (as Republicans were harassing him to do, as you recall.) Lots of reasons to trust Obama, based on what he has accomplished.

6.4 Dear no jo:

Since I know you read my posts, here is my response on Amy's behalf. You are, by your own measure, a bigot. Why? I have heard you trash Saul Alinsky, a Jewish man, as well as making consistently inflammatory remarks about your President, who is black.

We all know that you like to believe that you are the moral arbiter of this Board, so I guess that using your own standard, we can make that assumption about you, just like you make it about others.

Hey Dirt...along with millions of other voters, I do trust President Obama.

It may be helpful to a Supreme Court decision on health care if each member of the Supreme Court would make a three (3) hour visit to the wealthy hospitals and the poor hospitals in the DC area before making any decision on this issue. They should make at least a 15 minute visit in each of the wards of the hospital.

What a great idea but this would never - never happen when they know their hands are tied by the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Another good way to reduce health care cost would be based on their size or obesity. Any person, pound for pound over and above the normal weight they should be would - be required to pay a percent more - pound for pound toward their doctor visits or hospital care for what ever reason.

After all the great the body mass the great the cost of medical care.

I TOO trust in President Obama!

and SNAP, SF - what a great one liner!

and Fosz,...I'd say you might be onto something there EXCEPT - Heart Disease, Cancer and Stroke - costs more both directly and indirectly; but all of them combined don't cost as much as the smoking public contributes to Healthcare costs. (as well as contributing to ALL of the top three above).

Fosz: the truly obese do pay more. They have to go the doctor more often, usually have more health issues requiring more medication and they die sooner. If that's not paying, I don't know what is.

...so we're now going to make how you dress a crime?

By that standard can we treat any woman walking down the street in a really short skirt like she's a prostitute?

Hey, I bet anyone wearing sandals, ratty jeans and a tie-dyed shirt must have some marijuana on him!

No matter how you try and justify his point it's still wrong.

We, as citizens are supposed to look at somebody the SAME whether they are dressed like a brain-dead jackass or a respectable citizen?

That's kinda how my Dad taught me.

Hey, would it be okay if I wear a FOX News hoodie? Oh, that's right, they stopped selling those!

I have blond haired, blue eyed nephews who wear hoodies. Should they be stopped because they are walking down the street making they suspicioius. I see joggers, male and female, black and white everyday in the winter wearing hoodies to keep their heads warm while they run. Should they be stopped because they look "suspicious" in their hoodies. It is absolutely ridiculous to claim hoodies are the problem when the problem Zimmerman seems to have had was that a black teen was wearing a hoodie because it was raining which automatically switched that teen from a kid walking down the street to a suspicious kid walking down the street wearing a hoodie. I doubt Zimmerman would have given the kid a second glance if it had been one of my blond haired, blue-eyed nephews.

Holy cow.....thanks for the warning, Damage. I'm going to run right home and throw out all 6 (or is it 7? 8?) of my hooded sweatshirts. I had no idea that people who saw me wearing them assumed I was a carjacker.

Yikes, just saw your second post - guess the sandals and ratty jeans have to go, too. I didn't even do marijuana in the 60's, I sure don't want to be suspected of carrying now that I am 60.....

And hey, speaking of clothes - just because you aren't wearing a pointy hood and white robe today, should we then assume that you aren't a racist?

Hey, Damage, I have 4 friends who all shave their heads...you know, losing their hair they just chose to shave it all off.

If they walk down the street together would it be correct to treat them like a group of neo-Nazis?

Feel free to wear your "hoodie", Joanne. Those who know you will appreciate that it at least partially covers your face. As for looking like a criminal, I assume you're a white female. That makes you statistically less likely to be a criminal in the first place. Look it up. Facts and statistics are racist to you people but that's too damn bad, isn't it?

Pizza boy- Maybe you're not paying attention. Nobody says anyone should be necessarily TREATED a certain way when they choose to dress a certain way, whether they have modeled their style after criminals and gangs or not. But don't get offended when people may look at said person with suspicion.

As for your bald friends. Many friends I have who do the same are often PROFILED by Blacks who ask them if they are Skinheads or Nazis. None of them boohoo and whine and go on tv to talk about how hard it is to be a bald white man. They take it in stride.

Another great way to reduce the medical care / health care cost to all Americans should be based on obesity. Pound for pound. Each pound they are over weight - the more they would have to pay.

After all, it is the obese that are putting a great deal of pressure on the health care system. Most of the bad smokers have died off or stopped smoking. At least the cigarettes had a hefty tax on them that went to the health care system. Now we need to tax the obese or a greater tax on the kind of food they eat to make up for the lost of taxes made from the sale of tobacco.

Mark Zuckerberg wears a Hoodie and no one's shot him, yet! Someone should warn him, eh?

The Fosz: talk about taxing things which are harmful, how about a tax on hand gun and assault rifle bullets. Seriously, they are the things which actually cause death and serious wounds. After all, guns don't kill people, the bullets do.

If we tax the bullets, then we can use the tax to pay for all of the health care and funerals caused by the bullets. I suggest about $500.00 per bullet. Should be enough to cover almost all of the funerals and much of the health care costs.

@ damage whos says "Feel free to wear your "hoodie", Joanne. Those who know you will appreciate that it at least partially covers your face."

You really are damaged, and you owe the lady an apology you puke.

damaged - does anyone actually listen to or pay attention to his/her rants? I know absolutely no one who doesn't have at least a few hoodies. I have one and actually wore it last night as it was cold. I don't think you can tell I'm a blond woman with blue eyes when the hood is up - unless you're right in front of me. We shouldn't have to worry about being shot because of the way we dress - unless Zimmerman is nearby trying to impress his neighbors!

Jody - the conversation on the hot mic doesn't bother me - we just don't usually see it taking place in the open.

But once again Romney shows that he is just not ready for prime time. Even buying the best campaign staff he could purchase won't get this guy ready for the world stage.

This is a smart man -but he is someone who is more comfortable crunching numbers than dealing with foreign policy.

I've never seen a presidential contender make so many gaffes before - it's been a way too long primary and they are all tired, but he just steps into basic stuff -like the comment about Russia. (although I wouldn't trust Putin for a New York minute)This is the country we must partner with to bring stability to the middle east -yeah,Russia.

I can't believe his staff would write such ill informed material for him. Did he go off script here?

It may be helpful to a Supreme Court decision on health care if each member of the Supreme Court would make a three (3) hour visit to the wealthy hospitals and the poor hospitals in the DC area before making any decision on this issue. They should make at least a 15 minute visit in each of the wards of the hospital.

What a great idea but this would never - never happen when they know their hands are tied by the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

LOL thats irrelevent to the question of it being constitutional FOCUS I know its hard for you

It may be helpful to a Supreme Court decision on health care if each member of the Supreme Court would make a three (3) hour visit to the wealthy hospitals and the poor hospitals in the DC area before making any decision on this issue. They should make at least a 15 minute visit in each of the wards of the hospital.

What a great idea but this would never - never happen when they know their hands are tied by the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Fancy This Too - no matter who the aggressor was Zimmerman would have blood on his shirt. He shot Trayvon at close range - his blood would be all over Zimmerman. Nothing was bagged; Zimmerman wasn't tested for drugs or alcohol. He went home with his gun; changed clothes and told whatever story he wanted to. After all, no one is alive to dispute his claims. He made sure of that.

Seeking

There is an eye witness to a part of the altercation that is very much alive. He seems to back up what Zimmerman says happened.

It may be helpful to a Supreme Court decision on health care if each member of the Supreme Court would make a three (3) hour visit to the wealthy hospitals and the poor hospitals in the DC area before making any decision on this issue. They should make at least a 15 minute visit in each of the wards of the hospital.

What a great idea but this would never - never happen when they know their hands are tied by the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

There's nothing wrong with supporting our President.

The hot mic frenzy yesterday should be walked back today and better yet, should have been walked back yesterday. It was a nontrovery; nothing was said that isn't good common sense during an election year.

The question the media and we should be asking about the "hot mic" comment is why the press would think it wise to report the obviously hushed and obviously private conversation taking place between two world leaders. There was a time when such things would have been ignored by all the press corps out of respect for privacy. It is one thing to run for the presses when such comments are overhead at campaign rallies or fund raising dinners, etc., it is another to do so when foreign policy matters are being discussed by world leaders.

Come on, Jody. Try to cover up for him all you want. The man was basically saying "ignore what i say right now" but after the election "we can deal". Yet, he wants to present he's being tough with the Russians.

Put that with: He's against mandate during 08 campaign, now he's for it.

Mandate isn't a tax, yet now it is when going before the SC.

He said he'd have no lobbyists on staff; they're everywhere in his admin

And, we're supposed to trust this man. you go right ahead and blindly follow him. It makes me very nervous to see him be so untrustworthy when he's signed legislation allowing citizens can be jailed without trial and that he can declare martial law. Now, he says he'll never use those powers . Really? Are you sure? You can't be sure because just in the few examples above he's shown you cannot trust him.

Ha! So did you catch that spin too,Bob?!

Now you know I'm an Obama supporter and I happen to like msn and First Read because they have a left tilt......but First Read guys - you gotta be a little more subtle there! ;~))

So the media reports on a hushed, open-mike conversation and blows it out of proportion. This report opens Obama to all kinds of conservative outcry.

Is this the same media that conservatives claim is liberally biased?

Health care is all about cost. Since the majority of the tobacco cigarette smokers have died off now America needs some means of making up for the lost of this tax revenue that they have dearly depended upon. Therefore, America, the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS needs to take issue with the cost of obesity on the health care system now.

When a person goes to get their drivers license renewed they should be weight in. For every pound they are over weight a percentage of tax should be placed upon them. The greater they weight the greater the tax should be upon them.

Obesity is are greatest threat to America's health care system - now.

Nash:

It is fine to throw out red meat at speeches for adoring fans, but calling half of the world our enemy or implying that their systems of government are evil (thinking of all the European comments here) doesn't really set the table for good working relations in the future

I think it's way more than half the world. It's more like 99% of the world is evil. Israel and Britain are the only exceptions, and Britain is half-evil because it has socialized medicine (REAL socialized medicine, not the market-driven approach to health insurance adopted by Obama).

Great post, Nash. Romney has been running for President for at least the past 5 years and yet he makes a statement like Russia is our biggest geo-political foe. Did he even think about that before saying it?

It is sad to see the politicization of our Supreme Court and the fact that most Americans don't believe the justices are anything but partisan.

Obamacare should be struck down just because it doesn't cover dental! Everyone got their panties in a bunch over the birth control thing when that only affected 50% of the population, but 99% of us have teeth!!!

WE ARE THE 99%!!!

Houston:

Sadly, I think you've got a point.

Steeler Fan:

Hey there . . . long time no see . . . and I agree about the Supreme Court . . . there was a time when they at least worked to create the IMPRESSION that they were impartial . . . or at least not completely controlled by their personal political leanings.

Nashville Fan, well said. There isn't a GOP candidate I would want anywhere near the White House except to visit. They are the most inept bunch I can recall.

As for ACA and the court, I am more optimistic that they will uphold the law. After the disastrous Citizens United case and the heat they have been under, I am hopeful they will base their decision on the Constitution and on previous law precedents. Medicare and social security are individual mandates. Those laws mandated that every working person be subject to payroll tax deductions for their future health care and retirement benefits.

because it doesn't cover dental!

Maybe if you laid off all those 'sweets' you consume, they wouldn't be falling out of your mouth!

Just a thought... ;o)

Yeah, and maybe if everyone laid off the smoking, we wouldn't have to pay for their lung cancer treatment.

And maybe if everyone laid off their drinking, we wouldn't have to pay for their liver transplant.

And maybe if everyone laid off the fatty foods, we wouldn't have to pay for their heart bypasses.

And maybe if everyone laid off their illegal drugs, we wouldn't have to pay for the rehab treatment.

This is fun! What other medical problems can we solve here today, Red?

Another excellent way of reducing health care cost would be based on the person obesity. The more over weight they are the more they pay for the hospital and doctor/s visits.

Do you think if Cheney would have laid off the hate-or-aid, we wouldn't have had to pay for his heart?

I don't recall Dorothy and Toto kicking in for the Tin Man? Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain,...

Clara, and I mean this in the nicest way, but what the @!$%# are you talking about?

sorry, just saw this, Chris:

I'm saying when a man tells another to go @!$%# himself on the senate floor,...it's possible he suffers some level of hyper tension and that MAYBE if Cheney weren't such a hateful individual,...his original ticker could have gone the distance, saving us TAXPAYERS (you know, the ones providing him his lifetime cadillac plan) would have saved a lil' something on this particular procedure.

The 'socialism' joke about Dorothy and Toto paying for the TinMan's heart was just a wry attempt at - brace yourself - humor! By the vote count,...I'd say I hit the mark; but who knows? My brand o' funny is certainly not for EVERYONE!

It may be helpful to a Supreme Court decision on health care if each member of the Supreme Court would make a three (3) hour visit to the wealthy hospitals and the poor hospitals in the DC area before making any decision on this issue. They should make at least a 15 minute visit in each of the wards of the hospital.

What a great idea but this would never - never happen when they know their hands are tied by the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

because the system is corrupt!

Cathy

What about Justice Kagan? She was Solicitor General when the Healthcare Bill was form,debated,passed and faced Lawsuits. She should have recused herself for conflicts of interest.

Why BADpole, is it so hard to understand the issue for you conservatives?

Everyone gets sick, everyone needs hospital care at some point.

Why shouldn't the individual BE RESPONSIBLE for that?

You can skip the insurance as long as you have DNR tattooed on your chest!

another nutty conservative shows his colors!

I'd like to take my country back,...to a time when JEP wore his bigotry in the privacy of his own home and didn't feel compelled to display it so proudly and publicly.

But I guess I'm old fashioned that a way.

Now that most of the tobacco users and cigarette smoker have died off Federal, State and Local Governments need to figure out how to make up the for the losts on all tobacco products. The best way would be to have the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS to mandate a tax on obesity.

Obesity is the greatest threat no the the American Health Care System ! ! ! !

How do we tax obesity? The REPUBLICAN CONGRESS can mandate to the State, Federal governments that everytime a person goes to get their state drivers license renewed that they be weight in. For evey pound of obesity they should be tax accordingly.