What's truly sad is that there are possibly four liberal idealogue judges that will side with Obama over the US Constitution.

Although, I have a feeling Sotomayor might just have some intergrity and actually respect the Constitution.

Must be a proud day for Rep. Rush after a couple gunmen wearing Hoodies shot one to death and wounded five others in his own district last night.

I look at that photo and wonder how long it took them to all smile at once. Do these people even like each other? Scalia and Thomas are hopeless axe grinders. Thomas decided the moment he took the oath that he would take his revenge on the Democratic party for exposing him for who he really is, a truly creepy womanizer. He has hardly ever spoken a word in court, and probably doodles until it's time to pan any law that any Democrat had a hand in writing. Scalia? Hopeless. He should just stay home.

That is why 77% think they are just political.

_____________________________________

And the four lefty liberal justices AREN'T political??

Only a MORON would take that position.

I don't seem to recall ANYONE, ANYWHERE even considering the possibility they wouldn't vote to uphold Barry's ClunkerCare HCR. That was just taken as a certainty.

The vote on the mandate will be 6-3 to overturn. I believe Judge Sotomayor will vote with the conservatives. On the severability it will be 5-4 to uphold and on the medicaid will be 5-4 to overturn. Therefore what is left will not be able to stand with out the mandate and medicaid parts.

There are some good things in the ACA but more to be afraid of. To much government power. I have always said that the bill should have been redone and now it will have to be redone. I agree with Judge Scalia when he asked "do you expect us or our clerks to read all 2700 pages?" Remember members of congress haven't even read the whole damn thing. I further think that the Secretary of HHS got to much authority to pretty much do what she wants.

good analysis - breyer may go and make it 7-2. Kagan and Ginsberg are hopelessly lost

Ha! Some "Supremes" sound better than others!

It was very disappointing and sad to see the right-wing justices asking Teabag talking point questions. Aside from the supposed neutrality, I thought the SCOTUS was comprised of some of the best minds in our nation. The fallacious "broccoli" argument, really? I hope these justices will be mindful that what they write and how they rule will be historical, and won't make further fools of themselves (Scalia).

With that said, if they are to have their appointment for life, I motion to have them sequestered to a monastery for said life appointment, where they can't be influenced by the media, most specifically the lying media otherwise known as FOX Noise. Rise above it, Roberts and Kennedy -- ABOVE the fray -- you are better than that.

Agreed True Patriot. It was disappointing to me to hear some of the outlandish remarks frin the highest court in this land. They should take the higher ground in all matters indeed.

Its apparent not even the oath of office means anything anymore !

Boehner, Demint, and McConnel made that perfectly clear when right after the inauguration of the duly elected president by an electoral landslide of a nation involved in two wars and on the brink of financial collapse, they proudly and publicly stated that their top priority as some of the most powerful elected representatives of the USA, was to make sure Obama is a one term president. I will never vote for a republican for any level of government for the rest of my life. Not to mention signed pledges to an individual that super-cedes the best interests of the nation and their Oath of Office. You can thank those 3 guys personally, and others for making it my patriotic duty to never again cast a vote for a republican.

Me too, Forrest!

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

Forrest,

Never say never.

Hello thetotas, you know if a single republican would have called those guys out I could vote for that guy but he does not exist. These are the same people who said to democrats when they criticized Bush that it was unpatriotic to criticize a war time president and that it emboldened our enemies and would cost American servicemen their lives, what the hell happened to that republican idea right after the election. No, I call BS and much more on republicans, they were elected to serve the best interests of this nation not to demean a presidency, I will stick with never, in this case. If my crew acted that unprofessionally to the owner or his customer I would chew and threaten to kick somebodies ass, you don't have to like the boss personally but you have to be a professional and do your damn job to best of your ability, that is your reputation on the line not his. What they did is wrong, it's rookie crap, pros don't operate like that.

The far right bought the court years ago. We are just beginning to see some objectivity return. But, with Alito, Scalia, Thomas on the court, it is an embarrassment at best. There is nothing "supreme" about this court. There should be term limits on it - like everything else. These three are just a total embarrassment - bought and paid for by the far right.

Whats sad is when you hear a justice repeating tea-bagged party rhetoric.

Truly sad, since they are suppose to be above the fray.

Forrest,

You want me to hold them for you?

Yes I do thetotas!

Went to a shopping center yesterday that had a Dollar Store in the strip mall.

In front of the $ Store were several folks dressed in their purple and yellow vests, asking people to sign their petition favoring the Obama Care law. Yep, the 'Obama SEIU Super Pac' was out in force.

Maxx Power,

your comments are a joke!!

And so are yours since you didn't include Thomas among those who should have recused themselves.

Uh, Maxx, you are aware of what Chief Justice Roberts said in his annual report on the state of the judiciary, yes?

"I have complete confidence in the capability of my colleagues to determine when recusal is warranted. They are jurists of exceptional integrity and experience whose character and fitness have been examined through a rigorous appointment and confirmation process."

Kagen ... stood her ground against Thomas ..if he could stay when his wife holds her job .Why should she recuse herself ?

Da Noid,

That report further backs my position as to why Justice Kagen should have recused herself. Even the slightest thought of conflict of interest should have told her to recuse herself. I think her "that's amazing" email made that argument. Justice Roberts relied on her own judgment and we can clearly see what she thinks about ethics!!

STOP ! In the nammme of Heaaaalth So much for the voice of reason in a sea of insanity . ;-)

"Oh, you can't hurry love. Oh, you just have to wait......."

Sorry, it is Friday afternoon. Gotta let the hair down on occasion! :)

IPSC

Next line to your song "Before my heart stops! Think it over.........."

That's why i picked that song ..;-)

Excellent choice. A little off key singing and humor can only improve the discourse on these boards at times!

Torpedo, not likely. Once the healthcare bill goes down President Obama will be finished. He will have nothing to run on...man has he divided this country in a big way, rich vs. poor, black vs. white, religion vs. govt.

If the SCOTUS does reject this law, it would be by a 5-4 vote, indicating pure partisanship. In that case, I believe the Democratic base would be very motivated. Then it would be time to do what should have been done, Medicare for all, increase the medicare tax rate to 5% (matched by 5%) with ALL INCOME, including "carried interest" and capital gains, subject to the tax.

If that happens, the Senate should eliminate the filibuster, once and for all. Enough BS !!!

And its time to pay off the deficit, with a return to taxes as they should be.... 1965 levels, you know, where they were the last time we were in the middle of an endless war.

dirp101 ... a number of good points, and if the Dems do not go there it is time for a third party.

Dirp, if they return tax rates and the code back to 1965 levels you realize that would be gigantic tax increase for the lower, middle class and upper middle class dont you? The wealthy paid a much smaller percentage of their overall income and a smaller share of the overall government revenue. In addition if you create a universal care under medicare by raising the rates, you realize that will be a gigantic tax increase for all union employees today including state and local government union employees and likely a significant tax increase for lower and middle class that would be greater than the premiums and co pays they are paying today. All that for getting less health care benefits because employer provided plans provide greater overall benefits than medicare and everyone would have to get exactly the same benefits. I am not necessarily against all of that but you should understand what you wish for.

Mobilize the base? oh no another occupy movement with the morons chanting and crapping themselfs. What a base. I bet your proud.

Truthfully, the only way anything will get done is if President Obama is reelected. Why? Because as a lame duck president, he doesn't have to worry about running again and will be more willing to work with both sides and both houses of Congress to get more done. Just an observation, not an endorsement.

Hey Dirp101 - Agree with you that taxes need to rise, but the 1965 levels are too steep. All I want is an end to the Bush Tax cuts and a raise in the capital gains to have rates so that they match comparable rates of earned income. I will let the experts discuss the pros and cons of lowering the corporate rates.

Kirk it was either you or Alan discussing tax reform. Broadening revenues by eliminating loopholes like the mortgage deduction credit. I can go for that. Entitlement reform, (broad definition based on ideology), needs to play a role in reducing the deficit as well.

I understand that the single payer system would raise rates for people that already have insurance and may reduce benefits, but I'm ok with that.

By the way does anyone know if Judge Thomas spoke? Did he ask a question or present his understanding of the pros and cons of this monumental case? Unfortunate that some of these Justices are set in their mind/ideology and don't even ask a question to see someone else's point of view.

Yes, I'm aware of the changes. However, I think you will find that for most workers (and employers) a tax at 5%, matched by a 5% from employers, would be cheaper than the combined 2.9% paid now on top of whatever is paid for health insurance. Since literally everyone who has income would be taxed, the issue of funding Medicare is taken care of and the issue of the uninsured is taken care of.

I don't know what the average premium for health insurance is. However, I would hazard a guess that most people at the lower income level are paying more than 3.55% for their insurance, if they have it at all. A minimum wage job (fed. rate) $7.25 x 40hours/wk x 52 weeks/yr. = $15,080 x 3.55% = $ 535.34 / year = $44.61. If someone is getting all the benefits that Medicare provides at less than $ 90.00/month (with employer match) for a single individual, more power to them. I know our company policy is several times that amount and every year there are increases that have not been less than 12% each year.

My point is, if you eliminate the profit motive of private insurerers and have everyone involved, everyone gets interested in reducing the escalating increases. If every dime of income is taxed at 10%, the Romneys, Gates, Kochs and Buffets of the world get very interested in making sure that those tax levels don't have to be increased to pay for increased costs.

I'm aware that the 1965 rates are higher for all income levels. Maybe I should amend my earlier statement to say that the income levels would need to be indexed for inflation to today's average income levels. After all, the average income in 1965 was about $6500 while today it is about $50,000.

As to the increase on all levels (adjusted for inflation), YES, that would be a good thing. Once the national debt is paid off, including what was "borrowed" from the SS trust fund, then we can consider cutting tax rates. So long as we don't start two more wars and add any more to Medicare.. LOL

Yellowdog: the 1965 levels were high, however the national debt has never been as high as it is right now.

The current national debt is almost $16 TRILLION. Our national debt is more than the Gross Domestic Product. As it is, unless we increase taxes, significantly, we will never be able to reduce, let alone pay off, the national debt. The United State will, if we do not increase revenue, default.

As to Justice Thomas, his continued silence during oral arguments spoke volumes of his ability to understand the issues.

Dirp,

I'm all for freedom, but I would advocate even farther, go back to pre Kennedy levels like 1950 or so. Of course It would only work if we shrunk the government to those levels also....

CUT FIRST, THEN TAX.....

JFK - The ignorance of your post is overwhelming! The GOP divided this country the second President Obama was elected. They couldn't stand having him win over their "candidates." Our President has done a great deal to unit the country against all GOP odds.

You lefties are pathetic this President has been the most divisive President in history. He has done nothing to bring the country back together and more to divide it. No President in my life time has made statements such as "I won get over it." and "you can come along but you have to ride in the back". He refuses to accept responsibility for and always plays the blame game. He thinks he can determine when congress is on recess and when it isn't. He has no respect for congress, even when the democrats control the Senate.

He has appointed some of the worse cabinet secretaries of all time, with most not even qualified in the field of their selection. He spent his first year on a Health care plan which the majority of Americans still don't want instead of trying to revise the tax codes, but waste and fraud from in government programs and keeps yelling we have to raise taxes.

The best thing that can happen, if he gets reelected, the Republicans retain the House and take over the Senate to put a stop on this runaway President.

Some of Scalia's questions were based on right wing talking points that have been proven to be false. Do we have any recourse if a Supreme Court decision is based on demonstrably false premises? I don't see how we can be expected to respect a court whose Justices can't even be bothered to determine the difference between the truth and false talking points.

Well, since you insist, its still all Bushs' fault, both of them since they appointed Thomas and Alito.

That is what I'm waiting for. Obama's campaign slogan---It's all Bush's fault. Thanks Dirp have a good weekend.

Oh, you mean me? Well you asked... I'm still here, just haven't posted anything until this point...
Let me be the voice of reason here, The true difference is how they interpret the constitution, Repubs nominate justices that interpret the constitution as "exactly what it says", liberals nominate justices that interpret the constitution as to it applies to todays environment. Which is frankly exactly what we need in this political environment. Oh and as to the taxes raised above... lets compromise and do Clinton levels not 1965 instead. Ok?????

Obama/Biden 2012.

Socialized medicine! What the Left wants, badly....the Government taking over every aspect of our lives...what could go wrong with that?