E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSWe are gearing up for new installments of 'Inside the Boiler Room' and want to answer your questions, so please post them below!
Don't forget you can ask us questions on Facebook and Twitter...and follow us @mmurraypolitics and @DomenicoNBC!
Discuss this post
Leave a Comment:You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
If the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare, finding that the individual mandate is unconstitutional at the federal level, does that pose any danger to the Massachusetts health care law? Could someone sue and argue that the mandate is therefore also unconstitutional at the state level? Would conservative Republicans be willing to raise that issue knowing the awkward position it would place Mitt Romney in, or might Democrats see it as an opportunity to flip the script on him?
Nathan, the argument is solely on the federal level.
There is no question that states can mandate insurance purchases- they do so as a condition of owning an automobile.
So, the answer to you question is, no, striking the federal mandate will have no Iact on the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Oh- and if you live there and don't like it? New Hampshire is pretty close by. So is Connecticut.
NoJo,
Nathans question was directed to the Boiler Room guys...stop answering out of turn...and next time, raise your paw first.
LOL.
Mark & Domenico -- I read an article in WSJ on talk of a budget showdown in September. How will this effect the election should it get out of hand, i.e., talk of government shutdown again?
Oh, Mickey. That was wonderful!
I believe the argument is that you can avoid having to buy automobile insurance by simply not driving on public roads, but that the mandate forces nearly everyone to purchase health insurance regardless of whether they avail themselves of any public health services. That would seem to apply as easily at the state level as the federal level.
There is no clear constitutional prohibition against federal government mandates or statement of powers that only states may issue mandates of citizens. So if instead there is some non-enumerated right to elective commerce that such a federal mandate violates, would not the same action by a state violate that right as well?
Well, Nathan, for the answer to that, look to the Tenth Amendment, which gives states powers not enumerated to the federal government.
So, yes, states- or Commonwealths- can mandate their citizens to purchase insurance.
And, of you are a citizen of such a state, you can relocate to one that leaves you alone.
The constitution gives the federal government the power to regulate interstate commerce. If mandates fit the standard of "necessary and proper" measures for regulation under the commerce clause, then the federal government has the power to pass a mandate due to its enumerated powers. So the 10th amendment does not apply in this case.
Either the mandate is constitutional, or it is a violation of rights reserved to the people, not the states. If the latter, then a state mandate could receive the same level of scrutiny.
When or how can Fox Noise lose its License to lie?
I like fox news,they did show a dark side when they kept ignoring Ron Paul.
We are all waiting to hear from SCOTUS on Health Care Reform: if the Justices rule against this, which side benefits in the upcoming election? Or is it a moot point since Romney had the identical legislation in his state?
new -- i think you are incorrect in saying RomneyCare and ObamaCare are identical.
Would care to revisit your statement?
james: Would I care to revisit my statement? Hmmm, bit arrogant isn't it?
Nah...let's allow Jonathon Gruber, the architect of both bills revisit it:
"The problem is, there is no way to say that. Because they are the same (expletive) bill.
They aren't exactly the same but there are many similarities. You might find this piece interesting...it was written before the Supreme Court arguments.
Are you smart enough to tell the difference between ObamaCare and RomneyCare?
www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/mar/20/romneycare-and-obamacare-can-you-tell-difference/
new -- Arrogant for pointing out that you are making a misstatement?
If you would have said modeled then no argument from me but you are stating that they are identical which is just simply not true so I guess you are comfortable with your LIE.
Wait! Are you Jonathon Gruber? No?
Yeah, I didn't think you knew what you were talking about.
new -- I am not Jonathon Gruber. You should know that. I have read the materials and they are not obvious. You are simply telling a LIE.
You are being intellectually dishonest and are an embarrassment to those that look for truth from both sides of the political spectrum.
Which is really funny, james since that is exactly what the architect of the bill said about Romney, when he tried to claim his bill was different.
You, james, are simply a partisan.
James -- Mandate and mandate.
yep.
ObamaCare is not a mandate. Anyone can choose not to participate by simply paying the tax penalty. It is clear that the framers of the Constitution gave the federal government the power to tax. And to alter behavior by taxing. Everyone but Ron Paul and his whackos thinks so.
Stop calling it a "mandate". A "mandate" is what happens when Rush Limbaugh starts kissing Grover Norquist's ass.
Given the shift in favorability towards the incumbent President and away from the opposing potential nominees; what is the likelihood that the Republican strategy devolves to supporting House and Senate candidates more than their nominee for President? This presumes, of course, no October surprises.
Follow-up: Can the Democrats make a big enough electoral push to control both Houses of Congress?
Good questions.
Easy answer to that one--NONE. There has been no shift towards an incumbent president as all candidates get beat up running against an incumbent during their primary--that is just silly talk. Once Romney is confirmed and he is running directly against Obama and Obama runs on his record and Romney runs on his proposed plans and platform, if the polling shows in October 15th, that Obama is winning by double digits in the swing states, you could have a good question. Obama very well could win, but between Romney's confirmation and the election, the polling will tighten up substantially.
I'm going to respectfully disagree. Real Clear Politics shows the President leading from 13 to 4.9 percent (in aggregate polling) versus all the potential Republican nominees. Even townhall.com (an uber-conservative website) shows the President leading by 4 percent. After the cacophony that promises to be the Republican convention in Tampa Bay, Romney will have been savaged by his erstwhile tri-cornered hat wearing allies. Or to quote darling of the moment Marco Rubio;..."there were a lot of other people out there that some of us wish had run for president...but they didn't". If the endorsements get anymore luke warm than that, you'll have to break the ice off of them. Therefore, I stand by my query as a legitimate questioning of the trajectory of the race and it's impact down ticket.
If ObamaCare is found to be unconstitutional, what does this legislation do for the image of the President?
Like all good political questions in a highly polarized atmosphere, it will depend upon whom you ask.
Off topic but, when is MSNBC/First Read going to address the collapse feature with Newsvine?
A perfect example of flagrant abuse was the Grassley thread over the weekend. Thanks to the collapse cowards they turned it into an unreadable hot mess...
Pretty problematic to run a blog when everything on it is collapsed for no good reason...
Factor in, it is at least Monday morning
beforeif Newsvine gets around to restoring at least a few...You're letting the inmates run the asylum...
Doubleplusgood.
Dumb FUX -- Good point. What do you propose? Your good reason may not be the same as my good reason. Who arbitrates?
james: weren't you the one that told me that you always tried to be courteous? Do you think you are being courteous now?
I agree, Feisty, it is ridiculous to see entire threads nothing but names and avatars.
new -- Correct, where am I being discourteous?
Another thing I can't understand is when a comment has been collapsed, reviewed to be within the Newvine COH & restored the system allows it to be collapsed again?
Abuse of the reporting feature (!) ie. No Value, Inflammatory, Advertising, in order to collapse comments can lead to a loss of that person or persons use of that feature for a specific length of time. I have seen "over reporters" have that priviledge revoked for up to a month. However, those that abuse the system have often times been suspended or banned for other offenses per the COH and/or User Agreement by then. ;-)
That may very well be, I still think the feature needs to either be disabled OR a more 'weighted' formula added...
Allowing 5 disgruntled viners to collapse something that may have 100 or more votes makes absolutely NO sense what so ever...
PS: Newsvine can't even restore comments in a timely fashion, how are they going to keep track of the abusers?
Do you really not know, james? I regret to say that I now know that you are merely trolling.
I agree, Grassley's thread was a mess.
Feisty: I thought I read that Tyler had said it was a percentage of votes that collapsed it, not the five that we originally thought. Wish they would clarify that.
How about when a limit is reached that as of now would collapse or delete a comment instead an alert is sent to the moderators.
Then it becomes the responsibility of the moderators to quickly review the comment and make a decision to either let it stand or delete it – no more collapsing.
LOL!
I told you so! ;op
What's really creepy is how james fixates primarily on women & then frantically stalks them with his passive/aggressive shtick...
Me too!
Dennis,
Operative word being quickly - the trolls know there is no moderation over the weekend & take full advantage of it!
The worst of it is, he is becoming a bore.
new -- i refer to those that post here by either the name or the avatar that they have chosen, i do not cuss, i attempt to be civil but there are times when some folks are just so partisan on both sides that i get frustrated.
I did use the word LIE in response to your 2.2 posting regarding your statement that RomneyCare and ACA are identical which they are clearly not.
I do not know what trolling means.
Feisty,
So over the weekend and holidays nothing would be collapsed or deleted – fine with me!
Oh, I agree Feisty!
There might be some discussion on Metavine about it or on the COH articles by Dennis P. McCann. I'll have to check it out. I really don't know what the solution would be to stop it unless we went to a strictly "thumbs up or down" vote on comments and lose the other reporting features completely.
We would still have to contend with occasional "advertising" that sneaks in, thread derailment, paid bloggers posting links to their own blogs, etc.
There have been bans and supensions on a saturday, though rarely.
I still think a better collapse 'formula' is the way to go...
Factor in, the number of votes the comment received & rely more heavily on the 'flaggers' vineacity standing and length of time on the vine.
For example, anyone still in the Greenhouse should not be allowed collapsing privileges, given the amount of re-regs who sneak back in after being banned.
This would cut down on the amount of collapses Tyler & Sally have to deal with.
I'm not a fan of HuffPo, but they reward commenters in good standing special privledges...
Just my little ol 0.02! ;o)
LOL, so based on that nugget of brilliance, some left wing loon can post some socialist garbage that crosses the Newsvine TOS, have, say 100 other looney liberals vote for it and that's that?
What then would be the recourse for Newsvine? Popularity wins?.....lmao
Just like the libs that want to sh*tcan our Electoral College when it doesn't go their way (think Hillary 2000) & Trayvon
Mob Rules!!....lmao ~ DumbFux
Here's the other question about collapsing: you can vote "no value" or "inflammatory". Is each kept as a separate number to collapse, or are they combined?
Why collapse anyway? I find it to be quite easy to skip over people that don't really contribute to the larger discussion.
Or, failing that, there is the ignore feature. I think I have just one on ignore.
james: here is my final response to you, and I am going to make it as simple as I can, because you just aren't getting it. Whether that is by design, or an inability to comprehend, I just don't know, nor do I care.
You are using excuses. You are making excuses for behavior that you say that you don't engage in. You never refer to me by my avatar, nor do I see you refer to others that way, and I suspect you do with Feisty, since you are clearly a Fox "News" fan, and her avatar bothers you.
Who was it that said "don't pee on my leg and tell me it is raining." That is what you do.
You can spin around all day on one word, it gets you nowhere. That is your obsession, and I have little interest in it.
Now, you can join in the discussion on FR, or you can't. Matters little to me.
Poor james - he takes exception with my avatar because there is an eerie resemblance between it & him! ☺
Thanks New. I will freely refer to you by your avatar if you put some words there like Feisty has done with Dumb FUX. Sorry you don't feel any value in engaging in a conversation.
Dumb FUX -- No exception, anyone can freely choose an avatar that reflects them, newday may like horses, steeler may like cats, etc. There is nothing eerie as I rarely watch, surely not as often as many folks here must based on their claims and observations.
Have a nice day.
Hey guys, this thread will be collapsed soon! ; )
They can't help themselves.
Mark & Domenico--thanks for taking our questions.
I'd like to know your take on Mitt Romney's choice of a running mate. Do you think he will go for a "game changer" to address issues with women and Latinos or for someone to provide geographical balance?
Who will Mitt Romney choose for V.P.? Why, that would be corporations! After all, "coporations are people, my friend!" ;-)
Obama /Biden 2012
Cynthia--wouldn't that be the best. Mitt could eliminate the middle man and just nominate ExxonMobil as the VP candidate.
Good one Cynthia! lol
I recommend Ron Paul so his votes wont split the vote.
Im glad to hear that president Obama dosent have any connection to corporate america or lobbyist(oopps)
Given the Obama's administrations renewed push for the Buffet tax policy, can we get a coherent detailed answer as to what the administration feels is a "fair share" for every taxpayer? Since democrats have said that social security is off limits for purposes of entitlement spending, payroll taxes cant be included in fair share since they are just a taxpayers contribution to their future retirement plan, so the definition of "fair share" needs to be limited to government revenue received in order to fund government funding needs outside of social security. I would like to also make sure that fair share is based on effective rates not tax brackets. For example, those in the 10% tax bracket might have an aggregate effective rate of less than 3%. This is an important question given that Obama uses that word over and over to define his tax policy, he should now provide us with what he means by that.
It seems like everyone has a poll and everyone is trying to read the tea leaves looking ahead towards November. Some polls sample "Registered Voters" and some polls sample "Likely Voters".
How do pollsters determine who is and is not a "Likely Voter"? Is it more accurate to sample "Likely Voters" or "Registered Voters"? What are the drawbacks of each type of sample?
Good question, Noid.
Yes that is a good question Noid.
Also mainstream media polls are often a reflection of the polling sample:
Ed Morrisey reports the latest poll from WaPost/ABC is fatally flawed toward Obama, of course
" In 2008, when Democrats surged to the polls after eight years of George W. Bush, CNN’s exit polls showed a seven-point advantage for Democrats, 39/32, which mirrored Obama’s seven-point victory in the popular vote. In 2010′s midterms, CNN exit polls showed a 35/35/30 split. By contrast, the previous WaPo/ABC poll in March had a D/R/I of 31/27/36, which undersampled both parties relative to independents but left Democrats with a 4-point advantage — perhaps an arguable model for 2012 turnout. Today’s has a D/R/I of 34/23/34, adding seven points to that Democratic advantage and presenting a completely unrepresentative, absurd model for the 2012 turnout.
What happens when you switch from a D+4 to a D+11 in measuring Obama’s standing? Suddenly, his job approval goes from 46% to 50% — actually, a rather weak gain given the sampling distortion in the poll. Not coincidentally, the last time Obama hit 50% in this poll was in February, which also had a D+11 sample, after January’s D+7. Adding seven points to the Democratic advantage impacted Obama’s performance in all areas...
Does NBC and other news media have a policy regarding reporting of news , when the news involves the media itself , and specifically your own network?
For example, MSNBC and the Today Show are under scrutiny for selectively editing the recording of the 911 Zimmerman call... isn't this newsworthy?
Similarly, New Gingrich called MSNBC an arm of the Obama reelection effort....feel free to disagree with his characterization, but is it proper for a news organization to pretend such media criticisms don't exist?
NBC reported the Obama critique of Fox News in detail, but maintains silence on Republican criticism of NBC...
Did you see Mika Brezeznski at the White House the other day monitoring a panel discussion on women's issues? She was all too giddy to announce all the "administrations successes."
Then you have Sharpton leading rallies and doing shows on his rallies.
Seriously, what other network conducts itself like this? Too funny.
The NBC guy who edited the tape for the Today Show was fired. The unedited version was heard many more times than the edited version including on MSNBC. There is never an excuse to edit anything but some lose sight of the fact that the station acknowledged it and took appropriate action.
Seems to me what people should get their undies in a bunch over is the fact a person disregarded instructions not to follow the teenager, who was doing nothing but walking down the sidewalk, and that person left the safety of his vehicle and stalked an unarmed teen and somehow an unarmed teenager is dead.
Rob, think FOX. They rarely report anything factual and when they make a mistake or run "edited" tapes, there is NEVER an apology, never a retraction and no one is fired. Where's the apology from FOX for running James O'Keefe's edited tapes or Andrew Breitbart's edited tape of Shirley Sherrod? Oh, that's right, no one was fired, no retractions, nothing.
I agree with Jody. FOX exists for one reason and one reason only, to promote the rightwing Republican agenda. They make no pretense of delivering the news.
MSNBC has plenty of Republican commentators (Joe Scarborough, for example) and NBC broadcasts Meet The Press, whose longest running guest is Republican John McCain, along with Maria Bartiroma's Wall Street Week (she of the too-heavy eye make up and too-friendly towards Republicans point of view.)
Jody -- I cannot imagine how you come up with the comment that FOX rarely report anything factual. If you said rarely report on things you agree with then I could believe.
Your opinion of what happened in the Martin case is interesting but is necessarily devoid of salient facts -- I assume you are not an official involved with investigating the case.
Everyone makes mistakes, some apologize others don't but to be fair here is the report of an apology that was delivered in the Sherrod case.
July 21, 2010. Fox News host Bill O’Reilly offered a rare mea culpa Wednesday, apologizing for airing a controversial tape of a speech given by a black U.S. Dept. of Agriculture official that was edited to make it appear she was racist.
Jody: Look out! You have just been visited by james, the word policeman on FR! You may only use phrases or words that he approves of. Otherwise, he will call you a liar, and he will obsess about how wrong you are the rest of the night.
So, to get him away from you: Let me clearly say: Fox "News" lies daily.
new -- daily lies? i know this is likely a waste of my time but could you point to the lie of yesterday?
Oh, my God! So funny! james you just can't help yourself!
new -- you're right, we can agree with the "can't help myself". when i see someone as i perceive you to be -- intelligent, with an opinion you are will to share, and with a clear desire to hear and read the truth -- make such a statement I just know that you must have the answer.
I am simply asking for you to share yesterday's lie on Fox.
Thanks
Holy Cow Feisty DumbFux! I actually agree with you! Must be a Monday.
I have always been fascinated by the "collapse" feature. I have never used it nor have I ever been coward enough to whine and say that I was going to "ignore" someone....lol.....right Feisty DumbFux....lol
I figure I can always blow past their thread if I don't like it.
How difficult will it be for Mitt Romney to pivot back toward the center in the age of social media without alienating the party's base whose positions he has embraced just to win the nomination?
Really good point Jody
Which are better: Frosted Flakes or Frosted Cheerios?
Frosted Flakes...they're ggrrrreat!
Nope. Regular Cheerios. The best!
During tax season as it is now I get home very late and I have found the best late-night dinner ever to be Apple-Cinnamon Cheerios!
Seeing that Obama had to walk back his claim that striking down ObamaCare would be "unprecedented", if the law is ruled unconstitutional, do you anticipate an all out war on the court from the Administration?
How could the long-standing friendship between Mitt Romney and Benjamin Netayahu affect the election in Nov 2012.
Does it help President Obama's reelection if I post comments on First Read supporting him, or are partisans here just arguing in an echo chamber?
Cause I really, really really support the President, but I'm wondering how much good it does to follow politics this closely. I'm sick of the Republican thugs and their nasty campaigns. PS. Please no more Peggy Noonan on Meet The Press.
Boy, no kidding Amy. Noonan never did have anything of any importance to say.
"Meet the Press" is an isolated island of real journalism in the ocean of NBC and MSNBC massive liberal bias.
M & D, do you feel the Senate will actually take a vote on a budget...any budget?
No,they well get flagged for abuse.
amy -- I think this site is highly partisan towards the left. the majority of those posting seemingly will support President Obama regardless of what he does. There is a smaller group that takes the opposite view.
I think the Fox site is equally partisan towards the right, i do not bother going there anymore.
i have yet to find a site that provides a forum for discussion of viewpoints and opinions of all sides. If you have a recommendation I would be most interested.
I think if you want to have a civil conversation about the issues, James, you can't start by telling another poster they lie. Then, you're just picking a fight.
I think we are all at the point in this nation when we just want to get our debt under control, improve the schools, bring back manufacturing, withdraw troops responsibly, and generate an effective foreign policy. That's why I support Obama's re-election.
Amy -- I absolutely dislike using the word lie but when, as in the most recent case, the person making an assertion that RomneyCare and ACA are identical -- which is simply not true -- with an offer to see if they would clarify replies by calling me arrogant for questioning the incorrect statement.
I agree that we need to get our debt under control. I have yet to see a plan from either side to do this; I am all for improving schools but that does not imply more money to me, have you something in mind?; Bringing back manufacturing is interesting but I think this will be very difficult given tax structures, etc.; withdraw troops from war zones or from other foreign bases, do they returning veterans lose their military job when returning to America?; I think that we have not had an effective foreign policy for many, many years dating back multiple administrations.
Since you have a greater insight into what the President has done and will do in these areas I would be interested, but I do not want to read the President's website. I am anxious for a non-partisan view of what he has done, what he is promising and what is reasonable.
The President has a credibility issue with me and maybe you can help close that.
Thanks,
James,the Massachusetts healthcare law and ACA are not identical, in that the federal government paid for about half the cost of Romney Care, and the other half was paid for by a tax former Governor Dukacis had implemented, and which Romney simply re-assigned to pay for insuring MA residents.
I saw Jonathan Gruber on Maria Bartiromo's show a few weeks ago (she of the too heavy eye makeup) and I was impressed by his clear explanation of the healthcare issue. Gruber was one of the architects of the Romney plan and Obamacare. Heathcare should not be a partisan issue!!!!! We all know healthcare costs are too high, too many people uninsured, and we have to do something! I credit president Obama and the Democrats for getting something done nationally - finally! After Hillary tried, and even Richard Nixon tried. Points to Obama for leading on this issue. points to Romney for getting it passed in MA - too bad he doesn't want everyone in America to have health insurance - just elite Massachusetts residents, apparently.
Amy -- Right, ACA was indeed modeled on RomenyCare. That is my point as well.
I was disappointed at how the whole ACA debate came down. Kickbacks, waivers, "nuclear option", misrepresentations of cost, completely partisan (and it should not have, need not have -- both sides equally responsible in my opinion, continuing public dislike of the law (but there are some good things that we are experiencing now but when it all kicks in later I am greatly fearful that it will drag our country into a financial hole of cataclysmic proportions), nothing televised so we could see what was transpiring (this was a huge failure of Presidential leadership, in my opinion).
Still not sure why the Student Loan program was included nor have I heard an explanation of that. If you have something I would be interested.
Thanks
Good luck getting an honest answer.I never see even one negative opinion on the current administration here.Unless its from a republican.
I vote on how people vote and actions,or lack of.
Amy i dont know if you ever have been involved with the government in any way.
For me the military showed me how much waste and excess the government does.
I just dont see how the government can do better than the private sector.
Taxes and each parties tax plans are going to be in the spotlight who do you think has the upper hand in the debate. It says in your lead article that Dems have it so far but what is your analysis on the subject. Will have two classes of citizens (10% compared to 25%) or the Buffet Rule enacted (no upper income nnner will pay less then 30%).
Lately Mitt's numbers have reached over 50% negative-particularly among swing voters. What's the historicalrecord of those coming back to positve,or does the trackjust get wose?
I would like to see a day of posting things that president Obama hasnt done well including promises he hasnt kept.
Then the next day the same thing with Mitt Romney.
Also a day of talk about why congress has no term limits.