E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAll eyes on SCOTUS: We could get a health-care decision (and immigration one, too) as early as today and as late as Thursday… How crazy a month -- and yet how stable -- it’s been…. Bain gets more scrutiny, and how does Romney fix it?... Wrapping up Romney’s weekend getaway in Utah… And Obama stumps in New Hampshire at 2:00 pm ET, while Romney raises money in Scottsdale, AZ.
Saul Loeb / AFP - Getty Images
The Supreme Court is seen in Washington, DC, June 18, 2012. The highest court in the US is set to rule within days on the constitutionality of US President Barack Obama's health care reforms.
*** All eyes on SCOTUS: As early as today and as late as Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court will issue its ruling on the federal health-care law. And there are essentially three outcomes: 1) everything gets upheld, 2) everything gets struck down, or 3) something in between. But the politics -- especially as it relates to November -- aren’t as clear cut. But our guess is that a full uphold or a full repeal energizes the winning side and knocks the losers for an unexpected loop. (Then again, you could argue that the losing side gets to fire up its base, but that is still some bitter lemonade out of those lemons.) What is clear is that news organizations have emptied their health-care files. Over the weekend, the New York Times wrote whether the health-care law’s supporters ignored concerns about its constitutionality, and it also noted how the Obama White House is bracing for the decision, even an unfavorable one. And the Washington Post wondered if the White House made some political and legal miscalculations with the Supreme Court case. All three articles suggested the Conventional Wisdom that the Supreme Court could very well overturn the law. But no one knows how the court will rule.
The Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd talks about the monumental health care rulings on health care and immigration that will be decided this week.
*** Immigration decision is coming, too: Don’t forget: We’ll also get the court’s decision on Arizona’s immigration law this week. By the way, if you are a Republican strategist involved in a competitive election, you are hoping the Arizona decision gets released WITH health care. If it’s immigration today and health care on Thursday, then the GOP has to deal with another three days of the immigration issue in the news, and we’ve yet to see how any day that has immigration in the news is a good one for Republicans in November.
*** One crazy month: So when you step back and think about it, June has been a crazy month. It started with the monthly jobs report showing that just 69,000 jobs were created in May; then came the drumbeat of bad and uncertain news on the economy, both domestically and in Europe; then there was Wisconsin; then President Obama’s immigration announcement; and now we’re about to get the big SCOTUS health-care ruling (as well as the immigration one). Yet despite it all, the Obama-Romney race has remained incredibly stable. Look no farther than the recent Pew poll and AP national poll showing Obama narrowly leading Romney (50%-46% and 47%-44%, respectively) -- which is essentially where this race was after the former Massachusetts governor became the presumptive GOP nominee back in April. What explains this stability, even if much of the media perception has been that Romney has the momentum while Obama is struggling? For starters, you could argue that given this nation’s political polarization, this tight race has always been locked in and perhaps is even more locked in than anyone appreciates. Then there’s the “demographics is destiny” argument that feeds the polarization; and finally, don’t overlook the Obama campaign’s heavy anti-Romney TV blitz have contributed to the stability. Bottom line: It’s probably a little of all three.
*** We’re still in the 2nd quarter: Regardless, it’s important to note that we haven’t reached halftime in this general election contest. We always knew there would be FOUR big moments in this race after Romney became the presumptive nominee, outside any unforeseen event: 1) the SCOTUS health-care decision, 2) the VP selection, 3) the convention speeches, and 4) the debates. And we’re only about to cross off No. 1 on this list. We still have a long way to go…
*** Bain gets more scrutiny: After the Washington Post reported on Friday that Bain Capital, under Mitt Romney’s leadership, invested in firms that outsourced jobs to China and India, other news organizations piled on Bain. Over the weekend, the New York Times wrote that even when Bain-controlled companies filed for bankruptcy and shed jobs, Bain and its executives still made money. “Bain structured deals so that it was difficult for the firm and its executives to ever really lose, even if practically everyone else involved with the company that Bain owned did, including its employees, creditors and even, at times, investors in Bain’s funds.” Also, the Boston Globe noted how Romney and Bain once partnered with famed junk-bond king Michael Milken in a leveraged buyout. “It showed how he pivoted from being a relatively cautious investor to risking his reputation for a big payoff. It is one that Romney has rarely, if ever, mentioned in his two bids for the presidency, perhaps because the Houston-based department store chain that Bain assembled later went into bankruptcy.” Finally, the pro-Obama Super PAC Priorities USA Action is up with another TV ad hitting Romney on Bain.
*** Romney has more of a Bain problem than the Acela Corridor realizes: Ever since the Obama campaign began its Bain hit, there has been near universal agreement among elites that the hits were either “not working,” or “unfair,” or both. But as we’ve said before and we’ll say again: The Bain attacks aren’t meant to sway folks in NY and DC, but folks in three crucial battleground states: Ohio, Iowa, and Wisconsin. The whole point of this campaign by the Obama folks is to paint Romney as an out-of-touch Wall Street CEO or worse, one of the Bobs from “Office Space. And while the Romney campaign has comforted itself with the criticism of the Obama attacks by other Democrats (Booker, Rendell etc.), the campaign has done little to fix the larger image issue. So far, the Romney campaign has made this argument: Any attack on Bain is an attack on America’s free enterprise system. But how does it explain that Bain and its partners often made money, even if the firms they took over went belly up? And how do they now explain this Milken association? Does it keep using the “free enterprise” line? Or does it need to do something else?
*** Romney’s weekend getaway: Here’s a thought exercise: Imagine if Obama had held a big retreat -- say in Santa Fe, NM -- with all of his big bundlers. The Hollywood types. The LGBT donors. The NBA stars. Would it have received more coverage than Romney’s retreat with his big bundlers in Utah over the weekend? Perhaps the most newsworthy part of the weekend: the attendance of the Super PAC-men. Not only was Karl Rove there (remember that he helped found American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS), but also spotted in the hotel lobby there was Restore Our Future’s Charlie Spies. Spies confirmed to NBC’s Garrett Haake that he was in the hotel lobby, but says he was not officially "attending" the confab, he was just there. Spies’ wife also works for the campaign. The Romney campaign issued this statement: "ROF staff were not invited, nor did they attend or participate in the retreat. As with members of the media, they may have been in public spaces, and the campaign did not control that. We are fully aware of the law and comply with it completely." This just shows you the absurdity of the campaign-finance laws right now. The campaigns and Super PACs can’t coordinate, but they can be in “public spaces” together; yes that’s the law. Remember, it’s the “letter” of the law that matters not the spirit.
*** On the trail: Obama gives a speech in Durham, NH at 2:00 pm ET and later hits a fundraiser in Boston… Per guidance from the campaign, Obama “will offer Granite State voters the choice to break the stalemate between two economic visions on how to grow to the economy -- one that builds the economy from the middle class out, and the other from the top down.”… And Romney today raises money in Scottsdale, AZ.
Countdown to GOP convention: 63 days
Countdown to Dem convention: 70 days
Countdown to Election Day: 134 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower
Leave a Comment:
Vote for President Obama this November! If you are not part of the 99%, your life depends on it!
Today we start some serious SCOTUS watch…
To be totally candid, I have no idea how the Kangaroo court is going to decide. What I do know is, if the activist judges decide to play politics, this will be the immediate result;
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/24/505179/10-things-you-would-miss-about-obamacare/
Has anyone seen the repeal & replace crowd's solutions to these problems…?
If so, would you please share it with the rest of us?
Inquiring minds are dying to know...
Here's Mr. Mike Earnest on being fired by Mitt Romney's Bain Capital, at a paper plant in Marion, Indiana:
"Out of the blue one day, we were told to build a 30 foot stage.
Gathered the guys, and we BUILT that 30 foot stage. Not knowing what it was for. Just days later, all three shifts were told to assemble in the warehouse.
A group of people walked out on that stage, and told us that "the plant is now closed, and all of you are FIRED."
I looked both ways, I looked at the crowd, and ah... we all lost our jobs - we don't have an income. Mitt Romney made over a hundred million dollars by shutting down our plant. And devastated our lives. Turns out when we built that stage it was like building my own coffin, and it just makes me sick."
Who wants to go from a caring President in Barack Obama - to a Romney, who perpetrated these sickening acts? It's one thing to tell someone they are fired.
BUT ASKING WORKERS TO BUILD A STAGE...AND THEN DAYS LATER...ANNOUNCING FROM THAT STAGE... THAT THEY'RE...ALL FIRED?
Think of the speculation about the stage around kitchen tables of the plant workers, over the course of those few days. Families may have hoped for expansion, raises, more hiring, better equipment, a Stones Concert - who knows? When they were building the stage, not knowing its purpose, did they dream they were about to be fired?
The first time an Abuser breaks your trust it is often sudden, unexpected, and without warning. Belief is suspended for a while. Anger may be hidden under shame. The damage concealed from those around us. From my interactions with victims of abuse, I hear how hard it is for them to articulate exactly what happened. Accepting that someone did this low thing to you - to you - can seem so surreal. Perhaps you were just a child, or maybe a grown man or woman at the time. You start to wonder if you did something wrong, something that eludes you. And whether you're to blame after all, for the mental/physical/emotional/spiritual/sexual bashing that you endured.
Here it is on the record:
Under the leadership of Mitt Romney - Bain Capital showed their ruthless pursuit of profit at any cost - to the the workers at plant mill in Marion, Indiana. Making the workers build the stage and waiting for days before firing them all, was a pre-meditated act of cruel abuse. Folks' lives are permanently scarred. Who wants a man like this for president?
Barack Hussein Obama The Downgrade President
One thing is for sure, Obama “The Downgrade President” will henceforth in human history forevermore go down in as the only President of the United States of America to have led this great nation to these depths. We have had an AAA credit rating since 1917 and now thanks to a “progressive president” we are the laughing stock of the world.
http://www.deflationeconomy.com/obama-the-downgrade-president.html
Adding insult to injury, the downgrade president gets more downgrades signaling the continual collapse of the American economy.
(MoneyWatch) Moody's Investors Service (MCO) has cut the debt ratings on five large U.S. banks, along with those of 10 other global financial institutions.
Morgan Stanley (MS) received a two-notch cut in its senior long-term debt rating, less than some market observers had expected. The credit rating agency also lowered its rating for Bank of America (BAC), which got a one-level cut, and Citigroup (C), Goldman Sachs (GS), and JPMorgan Chase (JPM), which each saw a two-notch drop.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-57458237/moodys-downgrades-credit-of-5-big-u.s-banks/
Barack Hussein Obama The Amateur – and it shows
Stories tumble out that reveal a man who believes he is all but omniscient -- unwilling to give any credence to the views of others (especially but not limited to those across the aisle). Experts in management are interviewed who point out that he lacks essential qualities of leadership. Indeed, the book gets its title from an outburst from Bill Clinton, who was trying to encourage Hillary to take on Obama in the Democratic primary of 2012:
Obama doesn't know how to be president. He doesn't know how the world works. He's incompetent. He's...he's...Barack Obama's an amateur.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/the_amateur_barack_obama_in_the_white_house.html#ixzz1yo3o70W6
"The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree...and think 25 to life would be appropriate."
-Jay Leno
Typically SCOTUS releases it's decisions on Mondays or Thursdays. Because this is the last Monday in June before the court recesses, there is a good chance that today we will hear it's opinions on either Arizona's illegal immigration law or the legality of the Affordable Care Act or quite possibly on both issues.
For the moment, all I have to say is that I hope that the fates have chosen to punish the liberals for their overzealousness and hubris.
This week’s Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of Barry’s ClunkerCare HCR should be interesting. I give a 50/50 chance to either of the following scenarios: Kennedy votes to strike ClunerCare down as unconstitutional in a 5-4 vote, or Kennedy votes to uphold the law and Roberts joins the majority in a 6-3 vote in order to control the writing of the majority opinion by assigning it to himself. (Supreme Court rules dictate that the Chief Justice decides who will write the majority opinion when he is in the majority, otherwise the decision rests with the most senior justice in the majority) If ClunkerCare is upheld and Roberts joins the majority, he will write a very narrow opinion that will limit any pro-lefty-liberal big govt precedent to the unique nature of the health care market. It would not be a victory for the Constitution which was designed to limit the powers of the federal govt, but, at least it would limit the damage to govt control of freedom of choice in America.
I give a 1/10th of 1% chance that one of the liberal justices will not let their partisan biases control their vote, and instead vote based solely on the Constitutional merits by joining a 6-3 majority to find ClunkerCare unconstitutional.
Abandon Ship
Last week Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, Senator Joe Manchin and Congressman Nick Rahal of West Virginia announced they would not be attending the Democratic National Convention. Other Democrats have done similar things in an effort to put as much distance as possible between them and the president going into the Fall election. So while Obama is busy pandering to his left wing base, many of the more moderate members of his party are saying thanks, but no thanks.
This is actually quite a spectacle. Here we have the leader of the Free World on the short end of a vote of no confidence by members of his own political party. Like the vote where 69 Democrats joined Republicans in pushing for approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. Or where 7 Senate Democrats have gone on record supporting extension of all the Bush era tax cuts. Good grief, with friends like that who needs political enemies.
Obama can try to demonize those evil obstructionist Republicans until the cows come home. But the fact of the matter is the president's policies aren't popular even within his own party – we're still waiting after three years for his budget proposals to garner even ONE vote, for crying out loud. Yet the professional left continues to try and portray this man as the victim of Republican persecution, and thinly veiled racist persecution at that. Rubbish.
The fact of the matter is this president is in really big trouble. If you don't believe the polls, then just look at the actions of his fellow Democrats. With a weak candidate at the top of the ticket, those on the undercard are doing what it takes to improve their chances of political survival. And if that means abandoning Obama then so be it.
All of this is damaging to the president. Stay tuned as it gets even worse.
Outsourcing American Jobs: Mitt Romney led the charge.
During the 15 years he ran Bain Capital, Romney was shipping our jobs overseas, relocating U.S. jobs to countries paying lower wages, e.g. China and India.
Bain owned companies that pioneered the practice of outsourcing, according to Securities and Exchange Commission records.
But NOW Mr. Romney wants us to believe in his outrage towards China? "They've been able to put American businesses out of business and kill American jobs."
All this faux outrage, when CEO Romney himself led the charge, shipping U.S. jobs overseas! How two-faced can you get?
Today is do or die day for Affordable Health Care. Which way will the wind be blowing? Tis hard to say, indeed. The democrats would like to see affordable health care for all. The GOP/TP way is to kill anyone that cannot afford health care and the outrageous premiums. If SCOTUS strikes down the mandate, they are siding with the GOP/TP in implementing DEATH PANELS in which they and the GOP/TP support killing the uninsured. Perhaps SCOTUS will show us a face of humanity and let the law stand.
"To be totally candid, I have no idea how the Kangaroo court is going to decide. What I do know is, if the activist judges decide to play politics..."
So they would only be playing politics if they render a decision that you disagree with?
Good Morning Backhouse,
According to Willard, he has instructed the press to call it "off-shoring"
Of course, only in the world of Willard will his base will fall for the semantic game...
Chris, Dorr, MI
Vote for President Obama this November! If you are not part of the 99%, your life depends on it
Yours is the best comment it.
The right wing of the SCOTUS has insured the demise of an empire. You can buy an election. You can pollute. You have no rights. Impeach Scalia and Thomas!!
I prefer to not see my country collapse...which is the path he has us on.
I'm excited to hear the SCOTUS decision...as I think it will be Obama's silver bullet and send him packing back to Chicago come January 20, 2013!!!! It'll be the day our country is saved... I'm not a Romney fan, but he'll get my vote in November just because he's not Obama and has at least half a brain. Obama is either completely devious and a genious trying to destroy the country on purpose, or he really has no clue about economics. Anyone who has taken Economics 101 knows this.
Morning Feisty, great comment,
Workers trusted Romney when he was CEO, to do the right thing by them. And we know what he did with that responsibility.
Why trust him now - now that he is funded by Koch and the secret billionaires and transnationals - to be their President?
The media of post-truth politics is letting misinformation and lies ride, in favor of electing a President who will serve the interests of the very rich.
Fool's....
You got it.....the Court takes a leak on the healthcare mess and they are a horrible, partisan group bent on destroying America. They uphold it and there will not be an insult to be found.
However reading the first few entries on Newsvine regarding the biggest story of the coming week, I see that it's 'Bain Capital' that needs to take center stage. Can George Bush and 'Fox News' be far behind ????
progressive/liberals are losers. The Supreme Court will go whatever way they see as the constituional way. The left will scream and cry if it doesn't go their way, the right will accept the decision.
This administration had to buy off members of their own party to pas the POS healthcare bill. Over 60% of Americans did not want it. More than half the stes are involved in fighting it.What am I missing here? If the Supreme Court upholds the damn thing they will be going against the majority of Americans and a minority will be happy. It the Supreme Court strikes down the damn thing they will be going with the majority and the minority will have a fit.
I am part of the 99% and the last thing that would be good for me is to have President Obama win a second term. He is a failure of a President. He has done a very poor job. If his signature health care bill goes down will you lefties still say he's doing a good job? How about the Arizone law? This country can't afford a bunch of clowns that keep fighting against our constitution.
Good morning Feisty, Backhouse and all My liberal friends
Good Morning Backhouse,
According to Willard, he has instructed the press to call it "off-shoring"
SMDH...Only because of NitMitt's pride & prejudice against the 99%.
Fiesty, I will e-mail you pic of me a proud grandma, returning home form the Gay Pride Parade.
Still waiting to know why the new Healthcare Law is to the GOP as garlic is to vampires. The provisions in it help us, the middle class. Are the GOP politics so much more important than making sure that people man-up and be responsible and buy insurance? That everyone has access to healthcare without going into life long debt? And that 2 kids can have the same access and treatment even if their parents have different coverage. I have listened to the arguments on the other side and they are reaching at best.
Affordable health care for the masses just isn't in the GOP play book. Let's face it,what the GOP wants and will do is everything in their power to have a strong divide in financial classes in this country.
The GOP wants to keep the top tier people at that point and the rest of the people should have to fend for themselves. Providing affordable health care for the working class and the needy just doesn't fit what they want for the country. By providing affordable health care the democrats are helping the masses to be able to care for themselves and their families as well as businesses offering the same to their employees. That just doesn't sit well with the GOP. The GOP would rather have the poor and working class struggling to make ends meet and working for the rest of their lives while serving the GOP.
If a person votes for anyone from the GOP they are casting their vote to keep the power and money in the hands of those who already have it and intend to keep it even if it means job loses for the rest of us.
Downgrading banks is suddenly the President's fault. Who would have guessed? For the past three years, the GOP/TP has rallied against any form of regulation that would have ensured banks kept their precious high ratings. But said bankers told us that only they know how to regulate themselves and only they know how best to keep themselves sound. Well, folks, Moody's tells us otherwise. How is the self-regulation going? Bank of America is doing so poorly, they are barely above junk status.
It is time to quit believing anything Wall Street tells us, it is time to regulate them so tightly that they can't take a crap in the executive bathroom without justifying their movement to a regulator. Contrary to the GOP/TP belief, this is OUR money they are casting around without a care in the world. It is time we step up to the plate, heed the omens issued by Moody's, take control of OUR money, and make Wall Street accountable. Failure to do so will doom us to yet another massive repeat of 2008.
I find it truly amazing that the same folks that don't want the Supreme Court to make their decisions based on interpreting the Constitution are the same ones that were/are actively attempting to get "activist" judges on all of the circuit courts. They advocate getting activist Attorney Generals in all of the states and activist judges in the courts to uphold/promote their agenda. That's just wrong. If your agend is legitimate then write the bill, get it passed, and if appealed let the courts analize if it is legitimate.
Look folks, it's pretty simple. It's the legislature's job to write laws, it's the court's job to determine if those laws pass the smell test. It's the Supreme Court's job to determine if the laws are in alignment or out of line with the Constitution. Just because the Supreme Court is going to shoot down Obamacare doesn't make it "activist" nor "writing from the bench". They are simply going to note that the government can't force you to buy something that you can purchase by choice or not.
It's really lame to suggest that the Supreme Court is activist when it disagrees with the President. That's why we have a separation of powers, to keep each other in CHECK.
Only a liberal would let government decide what their life depends on. How sad and weak.
Back...
Are you trying to laughably imply that the media is in Mitt Romney's corner ??? Maybe news journalists are simply worn out by try to buff up the pomp of the Obama Kingdom and let the facts speak for themselves.
Found it?
Perhaps, First Read will be kind enough to enlighten us as to when the TurdBlossom LEFT?
I don't recall ever seeing that news....
Saw an Obama campaign advertisement this morning. Very surprised that they have to air in the NJ/NY area.
Watched Rachel Maddow get her clock cleaned on Real Time on Friday. It was so good as she was rendered speechless when she tried to claim that she is not a partisan who simply follows the Democratic line on all issues.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/06/22/maher_maddow_deny_being_partisan_cant_name_republican_they_agree_with.html
Democrats I like and can agree with....
Kent Conrad
Kirsten Gillibrand
Joe Manchin
Jack Reed
Jeanne Shahneen
Mark Warner
Jim Webb
Ron Wyden
..and I'm sure there's more (Carl Levin is reasonable most of the time)
Good morning, everyone, and happy birthday to Carly Simon and George Orwell.
Orwell had these prophetic words for us --
Certainly, that's proven to be the case, especially in politics, and on Fox News.
And Mitt Romney's so vain, he probably thinks this video is about him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUzEJiFpmsQ
Well, it is, but which Mitt is it about?
Have a wonderful day, everyone. And batten down the hatches because when the Court rules, in either direction, we are about to have a short spell of chaos before the REAL fun begins. But I predict it will be closer to the weekend, when everyone will either be hunkered down from the heat or escaping for the holiday weekend.
Lmao........ What a way to put it.
I have to laugh at the posts claiming the Supreme Court is a group of activists judges, meaning conservative. For some reason any liberal on the court is viewed by those complainers, as being the only judges with a pure decision process. Nothing about whether they are actually following the law seems to matter.
If Obama loses in the Supreme Court, it will be for no other reason then he rammed through a poorly written law. You can bet that if Obama is handed defeat by the court, he will blast them for the decision in an openly divisive and partisan attack. Unlike when Bush lost, he said he did not agree with the decision but he would live with it. You will not see the same class from Obama.
Regardless of how this goes down with the Supreme Court, this is only the beginning and not the end of the challenges of trying to implement this terrible piece of legislation. No entitlement ever passed by Congress has even remotely lived up to expectations. The nation was told one thing to get it passed, but reality will be very different. The bad far outweighs the good in ObamaCare.
Because President Obama managed to get something done, after the GNOP kicking the can down the road for decades!
Remember that nasty mandate was originally proposed by the GNOP & the conservative think tank the "Heritage Foundation"...
Oh, and, Willard himself in the state of MA!
So, we can say any adult who doesn't want health care is not only a fool, but is pretty darn stupid!
sand...
Yeah..."Impeach Scalia and Thomas". Right. I suppose the next thing that should happen is Granny Bader Ginsberg should be bumped up to 'Chief Justice'...correct ???
The Court can send a courier to bring the good news to Ms. Ginsberg after the current session ends. The courier can find her at her home...out back by the cee-ment pond while Ellie Mae stirs the vittles in a cast iron pot.
I seriously believe that this is pure jealousy on their part because they could never put together a Health Care Bill of their own. The 1%,ers don't need Health care, so the he!! with the poor and the "unwashed". Got to be a price to pay for this arrogant thinking. We'll see it in President Obamas re-election.
Romney. where's those tax returns?
OBAMA IN 2012.
Well, isn't that cute. I thought that was what one did with billions of dollars. Let's call out Romney for what he is - the Off-Shore candidate. Offshore your billions, offshore jobs, hell, off-shore the position of President. Oh, that is Romney, the off-shore presidential candidate.
So were you against it before you were for it? The President was. Didn't he explicitly state in the primaries that "people should not be forced to buy insurance". What changed? He didn't get one Republican vote by including this provision so we can only conclude that Democrats wanted it in the bill.
Kind of a HUGE flip-flop.
Another 'cut and paste' job from a left wing rag by carrot top again! Obviously she, like many others can no longer really support Obama's policies or even his onerous nationalized health program.
It looks like the Court will rule against the mandate and not too soon as far as I'm concerned. We've just been told that our health care plan will soon go up over 11% thanks to Obamacare!
I stopped listening to the lies of obama and his acolytes a long time ago... they've done nothing positive for this country for 4 years now.... can't wait for this error to end and that won't be long now thank God!
Job...
"...doesn't want health care..." as opposed to doesn't want a healthcare reform plan that is such a pile of goop that the President himself rarely even discusses it and hardly knows what is really in it.
A bit of a difference.
Anna Molly, in his book "1984":
George Orwell's shocking depiction at the time, of a Totalitarian State...
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
Today we start some serious SCOTUS watch…
To be totally candid, I have no idea how the Kangaroo court is going to decide.
Feisty, you are absolutely correct.
The idiots over @ the Republican/T-bagger Headquartes aka FOX NOISE have already predicted the outcome of how this decision will prove the healthcare was a failed policy
Oops! Fox News Plays Footage Of Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels During Sandusky News
During a routine news update on Fox News this afternoon, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels appeared extensively in archival footage as the news was read, despite him not really doing anything in the news lately. In fact, someone in the editing department seems to have mistaken Gov. Daniels for Jerry Sandusky, the convicted pedophile who will likely face life in prison for the 43 counts of child sexual abuse he was found guilty of last night. Oops
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/oops-fox-news-plays-footage-of-indiana-gov-mitch-daniels-during-sandusky-news/
=================================================
Of course, this isn't the 1st time FOX NOISE graphics dept got something wrong. In fact, the idiots get their news wrong 24/7 constanly. I don't find it ironic either. Deliberate is more like it.
Wait, I'm wrong they are lame brain idiots; it's not deliberate!!
Beverly in Chicago
Chris, Dorr, MI
Vote for President Obama this November! If you are not part of the 99%, your life depends on it
Yours is the best comment it.
____________________________________
So, Chris says if you are part of the 1%, your life depends on voting for Barry in November.
And Bev adds one of her usual insightful comments in support of Chris.
Talk about "Dumb and Dumber".
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is shameful. This country is becoming the laughing stock of the world. What's next??? Asking for tooth fairy money???? Asking for Christmas gifts????? Asking for funeral flower money?????
The Very Latest in evidence the wheels are falling off.
The Obama event registry
By Laura Wilson on June 22, 2012
Got a birthday, anniversary, or wedding coming up?
Let your friends know how important this election is to you—register with Obama 2012, and ask for a donation in lieu of a gift. It’s a great way to support the President on your big day. Plus, it’s a gift that we can all appreciate—and goes a lot further than a gravy bowl.
There are so many needed, good, and right provisions in the healthcare law, I do not understand how anyone could really be against it, I guess if you are mega rich, live on an island, and could care less about your neighbors along with being in the health insurance industry's pocket you could not support this law. The rest of us know it is a good thing, on a personal level I really like being able to retire before I'm 65 knowing I can purchase health insurance at a reasonable price. It is the main reason so many of us in my age bracket continue to work until we are 65. Being able to retire before 65 would be good for my own health and the health of this nation, When I was growing up in the 60's everyone had a job that could work and i think a big part of that was because folks retired at age 62, that left scores of jobs open for those newly graduated high school and college age job seekers. Seems like a win, win to me. Let me retire, purchase affordable health insurance, I get to spend my money and generate the economy, and my seat at work is empty and ready to be filled by someone who is unemployed thus taking the employment numbers down significantly. I recently had a friend and his wife who were abel to reitre at 62 due to being able to purchase health insurance at a reasonable price - his advice? Retire as soon as you can, it is the most fun we will ever have and you do a good and patriotic thing - you allow a younger person a job to support their family. Of course, that couple is just like me and my husband, been married over 33 years and are working middle class. You'd think employers would be happy to see older workers retire early, then they get to save money on hiring new employers and they always pay them less than the person holding the position for many years. guess the 1% really only care about the 1% and that is why they oppose this healthcare law, either that or they want to replace the exact same law with their stamp of approval and a "look at me, look at what I did" approach. Very childish and selfish if you ask me.
So in other words Dodds-Frank is a useless piece of legislation passed by the Democratic controlled congress?
Funny how Feisty was 2nd after everyone was complaining how she is always first to post last week. No shes not paid to do this or has no connections;) Bottomline is Romney has created real jobs, Obama hasn't created any private sector jobs that have sustained. Obama is for increasing Gov when our Gov is already too big, too bloated, too overreaching and too overcompensated which overburdens the real taxpayers of this country. Obama means more taxes for everyone sooner or later, that is the bottomline line, his belief of more Teachers, Police and Firemen will get you one thing for sure and that is more property taxes and if you dont believe me you are not a property owner or you are not paying your fair share. In the past 5 years alone our property taxes have increased $1400 plus, this all due to cover the public sector workers contracts, how nice of the police, teachers and firemen to take more from our household when our income has dropped. For those who want more, let them pay more. You want to cover those illegals and poor who can not afford their HC, why not pay more, donate more, do more to help them instead of forcing others to cover those costs. I typically is those who are not paying their fair share in the first place who want others to have to pay more so they can pay less.
Heath insurance for all Americans as a goal began in 1912 with Theodore Roosevelt
One hundred years later, the SCOTUS will rule on the law before them.
Talking about policy moving at glacier speed....
I hope the law is affirmed.
40 comments later & not one single answer...
Plenty of hate & right wing hyperbole...
No worries - it wasn't like I was expecting one...
I will respect the SCOTUS no matter what decision is rendered. I have disagreed with many with the most recent one last week when the FCC was shot down for wanting to regulation language and nudity. Only the scum of the earth would denigrate the great court of this land.
Only idiots quote thinkprogress and only idiots try to respond to lies. Because you put it out there doesn't mean you control the game.
How desperate Barry has become....! Hasn't the country has suffered enough under his inept thumb! now he would have his minions forsake their wedding gifts, birthday presents.... and any other pretense of happiness all to keep this idiot in power! Unbelievable! Such arrogance...!
Great way to start the week fellow liberals.
Chief Justice John Roberts will decide his legacy this week. Which legacy will it be? The one where history removes his painting and places it in the basement or the legacy he desperately wants--one of fairness for the people and recognition that Government can and must play a role in shaping our future, one which rules for the good of all not a select few? The Roberts Court gave the rich and powerful free reign to buy democracy in Citizens United. His Court overturned over 200 years of precedent making a mockery of the founding principles of the United States: government of the people, by the people and for the people. With one decision, we became a government of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation. Too much of the media ignores the double-edged sword for Justice John Roberts. His Court's decision this week on the Affordable Care Act will determine his legacy. Which legacy will he choose?
Has anyone seen the repeal & replace crowd's solutions to these problems…? 40 comments later & not one single answer...
Good Morning Feisty. There still isn't an answer because they are busy trying to collapse every comment on the board that doesn't fit with their greedy GOP mantra.
Good morning, Backhouse.
I'm afraid Orwell's vision is not so shocking anymore. Or maybe not shocking enough is a better way to put it.
We're closing in on that reality.
Hope you're having a great summer.
Personally, I think the ones who will be playing politics are those who vote to cast the constitution aside because they feel their liberal goals for this country are more important than the constitution. We have several justices who no longer use the constitution as their guiding principle, but rather seek to bend and morph the constitution to serve what they see as a higher purpose.
I cannot imagine ANY scenario whereby the original founding fathers would have thought their newly created government should have the power to force the citizens to buy something from a private company, even if they somehow felt it was in the best interest of many. Theirs was to be a limited government whose roll was to modestly serve the people, not a tyrannical monster whose goal was to take as much as possible from the citizens. They fought for their independence to get rid of something much less intrusive than what our government is today.
Good Morning Brian!
You noticed that too?
The freedom of speech Nazi's sure are busy little bee's this morning!
JoeNY:
The government can force you into boot camp training, then send you out to charge a machine gun nest in some unnecessary war. That seems more of an inconvenience than having to buy health insurance, which is generally no more painful than buying car insurance. If the draft is constitutional, then so is the individual mandate, which the Republicans invented and never complained about until there was a black president in the White House.
10 Things You Would Miss About Obamacare
By Igor Volsky posted from ThinkProgress Health on Jun 24, 2012 at 2:01 pm
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act this week and could potentially strike down part or the whole of ‘Obamacare.’ Below are 10 things you will miss about the law if the justices invalidate it:
1) Access to health insurance for 30 million Americans and lower premiums. More than 30 million uninsured Americans will find coverage under the law. Middle-class families who buy health care coverage through the exchanges will be eligible for refundable and advanceable premium credits and cost-sharing subsidies to ensure that the coverage they have is affordable.
2) The ability of businesses and individuals to purchase comprehensive coverage from a regulated marketplace. The law creates new marketplaces for individuals and small businesses to compare and purchase comprehensive coverage. Insurers will have to meet quality measures to ensure that Americans can access comprehensive coverage when they need it.
3) Insurers’ inability to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. Beginning in 2014, insurers can no longer deny insurance to families or individuals with pre-existing conditions. Insurers are also prohibited from placing lifetime limits on the dollar value of coverage and rescinding insurers except in cases of fraud. Insurers are already prohibited from discriminating against children with pre-existing conditions.
4) Tax credits for small businesses that offer insurance. Small employers that purchase health insurance for employees are already receiving tax credits to encourage them to continue providing coverage.
5) Assistance for businesses that provide health benefits to early retirees.The law created a temporary reinsurance program for employers providing health insurance coverage to retirees over age 55 who are not eligible for Medicare, reimbursing employers or insurers for 80% of retiree claims. The program has offered at least $4.73 billion in reinsurance payments to more than 2,800 employers and other sponsors of retiree plans, with an average cumulative reimbursement per plan sponsor of approximately $189,700.
6) Affordable health care for lower-income Americans. Obamacare extends Medicaid to individuals with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty line, guaranteeing that the nation’ most vulnerable population has access to affordable, comprehensive coverage.
7) Investments in women’s health. Obamacare prohibits insurers from charging women substantially more than men and requires insurers to offer preventive services — including contraception — at no additional cost.
8) Young adults’ ability to stay on their parents’ health care plans. More than 3.1 million young people have already benefited from dependent coverage, which allows children up to age 26 to remain insured on their parents’ plans.
9) Discounts for seniors on brand-name drugs. Pharmaceutical manufacturers are required to provide a 50% discount on prescriptions filled in the Medicare Part D coverage gap. Seniors have already saved $3.5 billion on prescription drug costs thanks to the Affordable Care Act provision.
10) Temporary coverage for the sickest Americans. The law established temporary national high-risk pools that are providing health coverage to individuals with pre-existing medical conditions who cannot find insurance on the individual market. In 2014, they will be able to enroll in insurance through the exchanges. 67,482 individuals have already benefited from the program.
Whatever changes the Supreme Court makes, it is an irrefutable fact that those changes will affect many people, of which the vast majority are hurting already. Giving further evidence, that the GOP/TP do not care about the welfare and wellbeing of the majority of the American people regardless of party .
All we hear is from these selfish politicians, whose cadillac health insurance benefits are paid for by the American people, it will be repealed, no alternative is offered, no solutions. Why are they getting these great benefits and we are not??
Yesterday I asked the conservative crowd to take President Obama out of the equation and give me 5 reasons to vote for Mitt Romney. I don't want to hear what they regurgitate from Fox. I want to know why they think he is the best candidate. I didn't get one taker - not one.
Alan, NJ
Obama didn't want the individual mandate, but he accepted it as compromise that the Republicans should go along with, it being their own idea and all. Little did he know that "compromise" is now a dirty word to Republicans now that he's president.
If you don't know the difference between compromises made in order to govern like the one Obama made on the individual mandate and a flip-flop made to get elected like Romney's flip-flop on the individual mandate, then you're just plain ignorant.
1. Jobs
2. Jobs
3. Jobs
4. Jobs
5. Jobs
You cannot take the current President out of the equation because he has shown a complete inability to work with Congress. Even on the Chris Mathews Show yesterday they discussed President Obama's new biography. The agreed he was a unique individual with great self-confidence. However, they also agreed that he has not learned how to deal with those who do not agree with him, and even some in his own party complain about his lack of communication. As Howard Feinman said "The Republicans didn't hear the Obama music". After 3+ years he has not learned this lesson and is a major (not only) reason for the gridlock. Removing him I believe will relieve this gridlock. On the other hand Romney has shown that he can work with a legislative that is not of his own party.
I know this is a waste of time and space but I am an ignorant old man so would someone, anyone, be so kind as to tell me which article of the Constitution is violated by the health care law? I can understand being opposed to it. I can understand resenting being compelled to buy any kind of insurance, even if it does protect the majority from the unconscionable few. I just can't find any article of the Constitution that is violated. I truly would like to know.
jody -- justice roberts and every justice before him will have a legacy that is constitutionally based. justices generally are not as self-serving or as narcissistic as politicians that worry about these things.
i have not read the decision but the court appears to have rejected most of arizona's immigration law.
First Read:
That's just more of the media's anti-Obama spin. The Obama administration didn't IGNORE the issue because it was NOT an issue at all until shortly before the legislation was signed into law. It took a while for the Republicans to work up the gall to call the mandate unconstitutional when it was a Republican idea strongly supported by Republicans like Sen. Charles Grassley, who was a loud supporter of the mandate during the Clinton years and didn't discover how unconstitutional until Obama supported it.
If the First Read reporters bothered to read the NY Times article, they'd notice that the only person who warned about a challenged to the constitutionality of the mandate was a Democratic law professor, and he didn't doubt its constitutionality at all. What he doubted was the ability for the activist court to refrain from imposing their extreme rightwing ideology on the country:
Houston- you have a problem. The draft is a national defense measure that hasn't been enacted since Vietnam. I didn't hear of anyone being drafted for Cosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, the current military presence in Africa (6 nations last I heard), etc. From What I've read I don't see why it was necessary for Vietnam either, but it was used then. In any case the premise is that our nation is under attack and unless we utilize our young in the defense of the nation our country may fall, so that is a valid use of government power (just look at the provisions within the Constitution- national defense).
The personal mandate is very much a different thing- it's part of why people chose to leave England a while ago and set up shop over here. It's that taxation without representation thing. If the government can tell you on a whim that you need to pay a tariff, duty, or tax because they want something (not that you would get use of it or represented by it) then it's a major problem. You need to pay into a system eventhough you like your current insurance, like to make your own choices regarding your payments and coverage, and like having decisions of your own- that's taxation without representation and by doing so the government is going to leverage your insurance company out of the market by requiring them to change their practices (thus driving up their costs to where very few people will be able/willing to keep going with them). So this is a means for the government to take over yet another of your personal choices- the right to self preservation. They don't have the power to do this, and that's a good thing.
Papers, please.
So what Republicans votes did the comprise bring? You keep saying this but I don't understand how if no Republicans actually voted for it what exactly was the purpose of the compromise? This was a major reversal of what Obama said on the campaign. I would think he would have ensured there were votes to be had before he would agree to such a major change.
So, in my ignorance I can only conclude the individual mandate was included to garner Democratic votes, Mary Landrieu, Ben Nelson and Blanche Lincoln for example.
Otherwise I can only conclude that the President is a lousy politician as he made a major compromise, reversing a campaign promise, in return for nothing.
Let's see - hmm. What government run programs in the past can we look at to see a track record of fiscal responsibility and success. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Post office just to name a few. They're all broke and full of fraud and misuse. How much common sense do you lack if you think the Gov't is going to be successful at running this program too. I will concede a need for some type of health care reform, but if the gov't has anything to do with it, IMO you are a fool to think it will work. Don't care what party you're from.
The question is whether the Federal Government can mandate an individual to buy insurance from a third-party. The Administration is arguing that this is constitutional under the Commerce Clause. The opposition is arguing that inactivity (not buying insurance) is not commerce and is therefore not covered under the Commerce Clause. Also, the opposition is arguing that there is no limitations on the Federal government is this is constitutional. What is known as the Broccoli argument.
Note that this does not apply at the state level as the state has the right to enforce an individual mandate.
JoeNYHouston-
You've got a problem if you think that the government doesn't have the power to start drafting people any time Congress and the president decide they want to. If the government can force you to die in a war against your will, it should be able to force you to buy health insurance to help keep you alive. If the Supreme Court rules the individual mandate is unconstitutional, it's because they've decided to rewrite the Constitution on their own.
The individual mandate was passed by a democratically elected Congress and signed into law by a democratically elected president. If you think that has anything to do with taxes imposed by an unelected monarch in England thousands of miles away, you're an idiot.
Oh, and by the way: George Washington signed a law that forced citizens to buy guns and ammunition during his presidency. Where was the Tea Party then to oppose that tyrant?
You've got a problem if you think that the government doesn't have the power to start drafting people any time Congress and the president decide they want to. If the government can force you to die in a war against your will, it should be able to force you to buy health insurance to help keep you alive.
____________________________________________
Houston: Lefty liberals like you should spend more time reading what the Constitution actually says, and less time bloviating on what they think it should say. Section 8 - Powers of Congress explicitly says Congress has the power "To raise and support Armies," and "To provide and maintain a Navy;" thus making the draft fully Constitutional. The question on ClunkerCare is "Can the Congress compel commerce that would not otherwise happen (forced buying of health insurance) and after compelling the commerce, claim the right to regulate it under the commerce clause?" That ridiculous circular argument collapses under its own weight of stupidity.
Obviously, your post doesn't mean what you intended, unless you think the (in)famous 1% are the ones that need to vote for Hussein for their life's dependency.
Joe HAHAHA
The Constitution also gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. Just because kooky connies like yourself like wars better than they like health care doesn't make the draft more constitutional than health care.
The U.S. Supreme Court already settled that. It ruled that it was constitutional for the government to forbid a farmer from growing his own wheat, forcing him to buy wheat on the market, and therefore compelling commerce he would not otherwise have engaged in. If the Roberts court overturns the health care law, with this lame excuse, it will prove it's just a kangaroo court.
Alan I understand the point you try to make about compromise but I COMPLETELY disagree with it.
I believe you are saying the "compromise" of including Republicans ideas in the legislation is not really a compromise since it recieved no suopport from Republicans. Therefore, it is not a compromise but more so a ploy to pull in more moderate Democrats. Is that correct?
If so, I do not think that logic is at all fair. Especially to say that it makes President Obama "lousy". If you at least split the blame questioning the good faith of the Republicans that answer would be acceptable.
The Republicans have openly said they are against President Obama. To imply that their refusal to compromise (a word some of them have already said they have a problem with) is soley based on the President being lousy does not make an ounce of sense.
Akeem, New Jersey
Alan NJ's logic isn't logical, either.
If Alan's logic is faulty, then what can't the government tell you to buy. If the government force you to purchase health insurance from another private entity, then it can also force you to buy anything else it deems necessary.
If you think that's the country our Founding Fathers envisioned, then you have a very warped view of what freedom in America means.
ConservativeNotRepublican
First of all, there has to be a demonstrated public need related to interstate commerce. That need has been clearly explained for the individual mandate. Without a public option, which the Republicans are against even more than the individual mandate, there is a compelling need for the mandate to support universal health care that covers people with preexisting conditions and that also avoids taxpayers having to foot the bill for people who use emergency rooms when they get sick.
Second, if Congress were to pass a law forcing everyone to buy broccoli, the idiots who passed such a stupid law would be voted out of office before the law even made it to the Supreme Court. The government can't force anyone to do anything without the ultimate approval of the voters.
Houston- The draft takes an act of Congress to enstate. Have you seen Congress lately? There aren't too many "career" politicians there that would threaten their re-election hopes by enstating the draft for anything less then an invasion into the US.
Just because the "democratic Congress and President" create a law it doesn't make it necessarily a good one. Please recall a few laws from the past that denied rights to people here in the US. They were created by........ Congress and Presidents.
On the difference between the US and England, look if you are being told at the government's whim to pay another tax, you can't choose for yourself, you can't believe that, you can't do that, etc. just because they want you to it's wrong. That's why the federal government has very few mandates, to control their power and size. We've bastardized that mandate to everything but the garbage collection in your town. Unfortunately a lot of people believe that it's more convenient for the federal government to control many aspects of our daily lives. Hate to break it to you but the federal government doesn't do a good job at controlling things. We are supposed to have "life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness" not government controlled lives, limited liberty enforced by drones and PC directives, and opressive government and debt that limit your persuit of happiness.
oeNY
It also took an act of Congress to put the Affordable Care Act and the individual mandate into effect. And for your information, men still have to register for the draft when they turn 18. That gosh darn gummint telling them what to do. But the government has to make sure the have enough cannon fodder if the volunteer force isn't big enough to fight the next war.
The government doesn't control what insurance policy you buy. It only makes you choose one of them rather than putting it off until you end up in the emergency room without any insurance for a serious illness that could have been prevented had you gotten regular checkups from a doctor covered by an insurance policy.
Hate to break it to you, but the health insurance companies don't do a good job of providing coverage to people with preexisting conditions, and they already have real Death Panels that figure out how to deny coverage to people who do have insurance if they come down with a disease that's too expensive. Belive it or not, the insurance companies are not in business for YOUR health.
Houston: Demonstrated need is NOT the standard by which a law is judged Constitutional or unconstitutional. The commerce clause does not contain any stipulation by which a consumer is FORCED to engage in any commerce against their will, regardless of whether you think there is a need or not.
Health care is NOT a right, regardless of what Obama says. You can not show me one instance, not ONE, since the founding of this country, where the government has FORCED someone to engage in commerce, unless they have first voluntarily made a decision to engage in some other form of commerce.
Go try and buy homeowners insurance when your house is on fire, or collision car insurance after you've already wrecked it. That's what you're proposing. And it is complete insanity, unless your goal is to force insurance companies out of the health care business all together so only the government will be able to provide it. And that's EXACTLY what liberals want to do.
Even Obama himself (before he flip flopped) said forcing someone to buy health insurance is like forcing someone to buy a house to end homelessness. By the end of the week, you will see that the Supreme Court agrees with me.
ConservativeNotRepublican
You don't know what you're blathering about. It most certainly is a standard in many cases. Laws against same-sex marriage have run into constitutional problems because the states that have them demonstrated no compelling need for them.
George Washington forced citizens to engage in commerce when he mandated they all buy firearms and ammunition on the open market. The Supreme Court forced farmers to buy grain on the open market when the forbade them from growing wheat for their own uses. And even if these precedents didn't exist, there is nothing in the Constitution that forbids it. The Constitution doesn't say how Congress can regulate commerce, only that it can.
Huh? That's what the individual mandate the cons are screaming about is supposed to prevent. For someone who's as outraged as you are, you seem to know very little about the issue.
You mean before Obama COMPROMISED by accepting the REPUBLICAN individual mandate to get some form of universal health care coverage passed. The Republicans turned against their own proposal because they wanted to deny Obama any significant achievement. That's the only reason they suddenly discovered it was "unconstitutional."
Houston: And I say you're the one who doesn't know what the hell you're talking about.
Bulls#it. The concept of compelling need has nothing to do with it. The concept that DOES have something to do with it is called the 10th amendment. Find me anything in the constitution that even vaguely refers to or implies "compelling need" as a basis for ruling something constitutional. It doesn't exist.
The Constitution is explicit in it's language for a reason. And that reason is to lay out exactly what is and isn't constitutional. You're using the same kind of logic that the idiots who claim " provide for the general welfare" means some sort of nebulous catch all for anything else the government might want to do. They conveniently ignore the fact that general welfare is explicitly limited to the 18 items in Article 1, Section 8. They just conveniently skip over that constitutional amendment thingy and pretend it doesn't exist.
Houston, here is the "mandate" you are talking about.
Second Militia Act of 1792
The second Militia Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted [required] every "free able-bodied white male citizen" between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company overseen by the state. Militia members were REQUIRED to arm themselves with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack. Some occupations were exempt, such as congressmen, stagecoach drivers, and ferryboatmen. Otherwise, men were required to report for training twice a year, usually in the Spring and Fall.
Anyone who reads this can plainly see that it is the equivalent of the modern day military draft. Furthermore, it says they were only required to arm themselves, it says nothing about buying a rifle. Most likely, in those days, you would trade or barter for one, but beyond that, the vast majority of men already had a rifle as it was an absolute necessity for anyone living on the frontier. I would submit that the requirement stipulation was in fact directed at a very small minority who might not have already had a rifle. Not to mention, that it was a one time requirement and then you had possession of a tangible item.
It has nothing to do with an ongoing cost like a monthly health insurance premium. The closest you could come to even remotely drawing a comparison would be with ammunition, which by the way, was limited to a specific number with no requirement to have any more.
But one thing you will notice with that law that still happens today. The putrid little POS congressmen exempted themselves. And for my money, that alone makes it unconstitutional to me, regardless of who signed it.
But beyond that, just because the law was passed does not in and of itself automatically make it Constitutional on its face. If you can cite me a court case where someone took it to the Supreme court, and the court ruled on it, then you'll have a case. Otherwise, you're citing what, in essence, was just an everyday item of necessity for anyone on the frontier.
Your argument also completely ignores the fact that the country was in its infancy, and by any standard of that day, requiring an able bodied man to have a rifle, (again, not BUY - obtain) would not have been thought of as being an unreasonable request since the requirement was being in a militia, not to support the rifle market.
If you wanted meat, you couldn't go down to your local Kroger and pick up a steak. You went out and shot it, traded for it, of, if you were wealthy, you might be able to purchase it, but most likely it involved hiring someone to go shoot it for you.
In any case, the mandate is to form a militia, and was that eras version of the military draft. The over arching purpose of the law was to form a militia, not to get everyone to buy a rifle. The purpose was not to force someone to purchase something.
The only way you can make even the vaguest of comparison is by taking it completely out of context to the period.
Here's case you're talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
That case said that if the farmer, (Filburn), wanted to by wheat, he had to do it on the open market. The ruling did NOT SAY that Filburn MUST buy wheat. Only that if he wanted wheat, that he had to purchase it, not grow it himself.
Let me say that again. The ruling did NOT state that Fiburn MUST buy wheat.
Your example is completely without merit.
Wrong, that's what the mandate is going to FORCE insurance companies to do. And it won't take long for it to reach such a critical mass that the companies will have to raise prices exponentially to cover the pre-existing conditions.
This is in direct oppostion to Obama's lie that the ACA is going to reduce costs. You can't increase demand by 30 million, (people forced to buy policies), and then not increase supply (doctors available and willing to see those patients) without creating enormous waiting lines, reduced quality of care and rationing. And that is exactly what will happen.
The Republicans were absolute fools to ever propose such a mandate. But, it was done to foil something even worse than Obamacare: Hillarycare.
So, you'll get no argument from me about the Republicans. I think they're idiots most of the time anyway.
But then again, I'm not a Republican, so I have no problem saying they're stupid little fools. I bet you can't bring yourself to say that about liberals can you?
But after all of this, if you're still reading, I'm going to say something that might shock you. I have no problem at all with Obamacare for those that want it. You read that right. I have absolutely no problem with it for those that want it.
My solution is this: For those that want to be in a government type, universal healthcare, single payer....whatever you want to call it program, I say let them have it. Liberals are always touting Canada's system. Canada has a population of 30 million. There are at least 100 million liberals in this country who should want to sign up for it, so, if Canada can do it with 30 million, certainly 100 million should be more than sufficient for those that want the government program.
And for those that want it, they are also the ones who pay for it and bear the government administrative costs. By all means, let's get all of those with pre existing conditions on that program and let those in that program cover those costs.
That should be liberal nirvana.
Then for those, like me, who have coverage they are happy with and wish to remain in the private system, then we get to do that. After all, liberals are always screaming about choice and compromise. So, let's have a little choice and compromise in the area of healthcare shall we?
And that paragraph I just typed is what exposes Obamacare for the lie that it is. The fact is that liberals don't want to have any choice, or compromise. They want to force everyone into the system whether they like it or not, because the dirty little secret is that liberals know that those that sign up for the government program will soon find out that it costs far more than the private counterpart, and when that happens, they will, as liberals always do, demand that someone else be the one to pay for it.
And THAT is the real bottom line of liberals and health care.
Oh, one more thing, just in the interest of full disclosure here. My wife is a pediatrician in private practice for 19 years.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, providefor the common defence, promotethe general Welfare, and securethe Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The preamble of the Constitution tells us its purpose. There are five specific objectives and how the Constitution is to handle these is identified by the verbs associated with such. All of the verbs but one indicates that the Constitution is to without question establish, insure, provide and secure, justice, peace, defense, and liberty. The one where the Constitution says the government is to only Promoteis that of general Welfare. That leads me to believe that if the Government mandates anything that is outside of the 4 areas prescribed it is in violation of the Constitution. General welfare would include such things as Health Care. By its own definition the Constitution should only allow the government to Promote such.
The SCOTUS should strike down the Healthcare law. This is so clear. The Government can promote, suggest, and encourage but by no means mandate a General Welfare item such as healthcare or the insurance to pay for it.
Verbs are the words that tell us what we can and cannot do. They are the borders upon which actions are defined. When reading documents such as constitutions, contracts, and legislation always pay attention to the VERBS!
West Coast Bruce: You understand that, and I understand that: But I can't count how many times someone who doesn't have a clue what the Constitution actually says, trots out the "general welfare" argument as somehow being a justification for the government to do anything it wishes.
Madison, in the Federalist Papers numbers 40 to 44, made it explicitly clear that the general welfare clause meant no such thing, and was in fact meant to be limited to the 18 enumerated powers listed in Article 1, Section 8.
In addition, as you stated, in the preamble, the word used is PROMOTE. You will only find the word PROVIDE in Article 1, Section 8, and then that section of the Constitution goes on to specifically list those items that are to be provided.
It seems that many can't get that simple concept through their head.
To live and die by the constitution is neither practical nor what the framers of it expected nor wanted, that's why they have something called amendments to the constitution. The traffic laws are not enforced for horse and buggy times. There were even laws limiting the speed of trains,somewhere around 12 m.p.h.
The arguments about a National health Care System. Many of the taxpaying population complain about the tax payer paying for non-insured citizens receiving medical help,except in an emergency. I would think that by that you mean the uninsured.The federal medical insurance plan is no different ,except that the insurance companies would possibly be eliminated and the population should be protected from gouging . Nothing is ever free,but medical health is now considered as a part of the citizens rights by most of us,that is the second part of why the majority want it . The first part 'I have explained previously, although most of us,who don't expect anything for free didn't need an explanation.
listoire: I agree. The Founding Fathers absolutely knew that there were circumstances that would occur that they could not foresee. That's one of just many things about the Constitution that make it such an incredible document.
The Founding Fathers built in a way that would allow for it to be changed. But they were also confident enough in the principles they set forth, that they also knew that any mechanism to change it should be of sufficient weight and difficulty, that it could not be done on a whim: That the basic principles were sound enough to withstand the whim of a group of politicians who might try and usurp the Constitution for their own purposes.
To that end, the fact that the Constitution has only been amended 26 times in over 200 years speaks well of the soundness of the thinking of the Founding Fathers.
Today, the problem is that the one thing the Founding Fathers, even though they knew it could happen, could not build into the Constitution was a way to prevent politicians from just ignoring the document all together. Far too often, that's exactly what we have today.
listoire:
Then by all means, work to change the Constitution. If you have as big a majority as you claim, then it will pass. Personally, I don't believe that to be true. But, as I said, if you think you've got the numbers, then work through the channels the Constitution allows for, and change it using the method that was built in.
Regardless of what your claimed majority feels to be a right, it is, in fact, not a right until the Constitution is amended to reflect that, or a Supreme Court ruling comes down saying a case brought before it allows for that right.
You will know on Thursday what that decision is. Personally, I would suggest you start working on that Constitutional convention, because I think the Supreme Court is going to rule Obamacare unconstitutional. And if Obamacare is unconstitutional, then certainly anything beyond that is also going to be unconstitutional as well.
If it goes the other way, I think you will soon find out that the right that you claim will quickly turn out to be a case of "be careful what you wish for, you might just get it."
Here's Mr. Mike Earnest on being fired by Mitt Romney's Bain Capital, at a paper plant in Marion, Indiana:
"Out of the blue one day, we were told to build a 30 foot stage.
Gathered the guys, and we BUILT that 30 foot stage. Not knowing what it was for. Just days later, all three shifts were told to assemble in the warehouse.
A group of people walked out on that stage, and told us that "the plant is now closed, and all of you are FIRED."
I looked both ways, I looked at the crowd, and ah... we all lost our jobs - we don't have an income. Mitt Romney made over a hundred million dollars by shutting down our plant. And devastated our lives. Turns out when we built that stage it was like building my own coffin, and it just makes me sick."
Who wants to go from a caring President in Barack Obama - to a Romney, who perpetrated these sickening acts? It's one thing to tell someone they are fired.
BUT ASKING WORKERS TO BUILD A STAGE...AND THEN DAYS LATER...ANNOUNCING FROM THAT STAGE... THAT THEY'RE...ALL FIRED?
Think of the speculation about the stage around kitchen tables of the plant workers, over the course of those few days. Families may have hoped for expansion, raises, more hiring, better equipment, a Stones Concert - who knows? When they were building the stage, not knowing its purpose, did they dream they were about to be fired?
The first time an Abuser breaks your trust it is often sudden, unexpected, and without warning. Belief is suspended for a while. Anger may be hidden under shame. The damage concealed from those around us. From my interactions with victims of abuse, I hear how hard it is for them to articulate exactly what happened. Accepting that someone did this low thing to you - to you - can seem so surreal. Perhaps you were just a child, or maybe a grown man or woman at the time. You start to wonder if you did something wrong, something that eludes you. And whether you're to blame after all, for the mental/physical/emotional/spiritual/sexual bashing that you endured.
Here it is on the record:
Under the leadership of Mitt Romney - Bain Capital showed their ruthless pursuit of profit at any cost - to the the workers at plant mill in Marion, Indiana. Making the workers build the stage and waiting for days before firing them all, was a pre-meditated act of cruel abuse. Folks' lives are permanently scarred. Who wants a man like this for president?
Blah blah blah. Obama doesn't mind taking campaign money from Bain supporters, however.
Baa, Baa, yourself.
What Bain did in Marion, Indiana to the plant workers:
Making them build a stage, then waiting days to tell them from that stage they are all fired - was unconscionable, debasing and unforgettable.
Hell no to Romney, and his vulture capitalism!
They probably got fired because their union created demands that made business unfeasible so it had to go overseas. We are not competitive when it comes to manufacturing. That was not Bain capitals fault. Should we prop up failing companies to keep people working? It doesn't work that way in capitolism.
Doesn't Romney the Antichrist Make you feel all American... "Mean, anti social, hatred, prejudices", yep makes me proud, just as the Fuehrer before him..
Neither Candidate "Bama/Romney", are a good Option for American they may look like two different people but they're the same machine behind this fraud they the Corporations who wish to control us make us all slaves so they can live extravagantly, just like the NWO thought it would! We will not tolerate domination of our civil rights better to give life for liberty than live as your servant.
The reason they got pariah-ed so easily Mr. Sheepington,
Was because it was a non-Union outfit.
Today we start some serious SCOTUS watch…
To be totally candid, I have no idea how the Kangaroo court is going to decide. What I do know is, if the activist judges decide to play politics, this will be the immediate result;
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/24/505179/10-things-you-would-miss-about-obamacare/
Has anyone seen the repeal & replace crowd's solutions to these problems…?
If so, would you please share it with the rest of us?
Inquiring minds are dying to know...
Backhorse, do you think the thousands of people employed by Staples would have a different story? Your bias is showing on an article that address only the Supreme Court. I've already read you posts and you clearly show no respect for the Court like Obama and his progressives, and no respect for the Constitution...why are you still in this country ~ for the handouts?
First Read:
Another important question is: Why is the media promoting the narrative that Obama is struggling while Romney has the momentum when the polls consistently show that narrative is false? Some cynics might say that the corporate media is trying to start a "bandwagon effect" to help out the corporate candidate and pioneer of "off-shoring" American jobs: Willard Mitt Romney.
Mr. Manufacture & Insult, Needs Eyeglasses:
Which of my posts today, was about the Supreme Court?
Barack Hussein Obama The Downgrade President
One thing is for sure, Obama “The Downgrade President” will henceforth in human history forevermore go down in as the only President of the United States of America to have led this great nation to these depths. We have had an AAA credit rating since 1917 and now thanks to a “progressive president” we are the laughing stock of the world.
http://www.deflationeconomy.com/obama-the-downgrade-president.html
Adding insult to injury, the downgrade president gets more downgrades signaling the continual collapse of the American economy.
(MoneyWatch) Moody's Investors Service (MCO) has cut the debt ratings on five large U.S. banks, along with those of 10 other global financial institutions.
Morgan Stanley (MS) received a two-notch cut in its senior long-term debt rating, less than some market observers had expected. The credit rating agency also lowered its rating for Bank of America (BAC), which got a one-level cut, and Citigroup (C), Goldman Sachs (GS), and JPMorgan Chase (JPM), which each saw a two-notch drop.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-57458237/moodys-downgrades-credit-of-5-big-u.s-banks/
Barack Hussein Obama The Amateur – and it shows
Stories tumble out that reveal a man who believes he is all but omniscient -- unwilling to give any credence to the views of others (especially but not limited to those across the aisle). Experts in management are interviewed who point out that he lacks essential qualities of leadership. Indeed, the book gets its title from an outburst from Bill Clinton, who was trying to encourage Hillary to take on Obama in the Democratic primary of 2012:
Obama doesn't know how to be president. He doesn't know how the world works. He's incompetent. He's...he's...Barack Obama's an amateur.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/the_amateur_barack_obama_in_the_white_house.html#ixzz1yo3o70W6
TJM07:
Backhouse is just regurgitating claims made by the latest Obama campaign ad. What they fail to mention is that Jonathan Lavine, close friend and campaign contributor of Barack Obama who once sat on the board at Bain Capital, probably had more to do with Ampad's closure than Romney did.
This is shameful. This country is becoming the laughing stock of the world. What's next??? Asking for tooth fairy money???? Asking for Christmas gifts????? Asking for funeral flower money?????
The Very Latest in evidence the wheels are falling off.
The Obama event registry
By Laura Wilson on June 22, 2012
Got a birthday, anniversary, or wedding coming up?
Let your friends know how important this election is to you—register with Obama 2012, and ask for a donation in lieu of a gift. It’s a great way to support the President on your big day. Plus, it’s a gift that we can all appreciate—and goes a lot further than a gravy bowl.
et tu Backhouse....! carrot top can no longer find words to support obummer, and you have to retread Barry's failed attempt to discredit Romney because of his affiliation with Bain!!!
Shame on you.... why don't you admit the fact that you and dumb fux can no longer come up with a real reason why you can still support the neighborhood organizer? Barry is playing his fiddle while 'Rome' is crumbling around him and you talk about Bain!!!
Mr. Misinformation 2012:
The words by Mr. Earnest about building the stage at the paper plant, and then being fired en masse:
WAS QUOTED VERBATIM.
I WATCHED HIM SAY EVERY WORD.
We are already seeing higher costs due to the 'affordable' care act. Looks like its more lies and making our lives worse. That is a prevailing theme with the do-gooder liberals, try to help people, in their minds, but in reality it makes things worse. What makes it worse is that people are crafty, and will find ways to get the 'free money' that liberals love to confiscate from anyone who has it. Did anyone tell you that Robin Hood was a common criminal? What happens when Robin Hood steals the last dime from those evil 'rich' people? Stealing someones wealth is wrong, even institutionalized stealing i.e. government.
When the SCOTUS Strikes down Obama's false interpertation of the Constitution all the libs will be furious, why? Just doing their jobs unlike our Presidents warped judgement!
Ben,
Why are you still talking about the downgrade of the credit rating when everyone here knows, including S & P, that it was the republicans obstructionism that lead to the downgrade. Even going infont of cameras calling for it as if it was a good thing. Say "we dont need to raise the debt ceiling we can prioritize our expenses" which was code word for lets see how many more public sector workers we can affect in this mass layoff that would have occured had the debt ceiling not been raised. Or how many folks would not get their SS checks... Regarding the downgrade, that is not me talking, it is the words of the finance professionals that did the down grading.
Why can republicans come up with a legitimate criticism of the president without spreading misinformation or incomplete information which is exactly what you are doing Ben!
It would appear that Obama made a big mistake in pushing for 'Amnesty' for illegal immigrants. Before his 'Executive Order' (which could only last for 7 months), he led Romney or they were tied, but since then it has been downhill for Obama, as shown by the latest polling by Rasmussen (easily the most accurate pollster in the last 2 Presidential elections);
"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows Mitt Romney attracting 48% of the vote, while President Obama earns 43%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided."
The sad thing about Obama's order is that it calls for young Hispanics to come forward, identify themselves as illegal immigrants, and provide their place of birth, age, address, telephone numbers, etc. - all the information needed to move them to the top of the deportation list.
In Obama's desperate attempt to get the Hispanics excited, he may be putting their young people at great risk, and their parents/siblings as well - all for a cheap political stunt.
As benefit Administrator of our Group Health Care Plan, I just received notice that our "benefits will be modified to comply with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) also known as Health Care Reform." The list of modifications for 2013 follows therein.
After reading the modifications it all seems very positive and a massive step in the right direction to save our broken system. Hopefully, time and Congress will fine tune the Bill but throwing it out would be regressive.
Over the weekend, Romney's campaign tried to say there is a difference between outsourcing and offshoring.
The reality is one sends manufacturing jobs to China, the other sends jobs requiring a degree to China.
Gov. Romney's campaign fumbled and admitted they are to blame for so many companies moving white collar jobs overseas.
All college graduates looking for a job, tell Governor Romney and his campaign what you think of Romney showing American businesses how to move your jobs to China?
Fiesty (post 2.7)
I guess it’s only a Kangaroo court when the court rules against something you favor.
It’s Congress that’s more pathetic that the Supreme Court, specifically the Democratically controlled 111th Congress. Supreme Court Justices have a tremendous vetting process and are some of the most brilliant legal minds in the country. Congressional Representatives are often elected based on gerrymandered districts, elected to office by pandering to certain groups with the pledge to spend other people’s money for the benefit of their constitutes. As Nancy Pelosi infamously told us “We have to pass the Bill in order to know what’s in it.”
Well, now that we know what’s in it, the American people have tossed Pelosi and the Democrats out of power in the House. And we'll do so in the Senate. We'll also remove the Community Organizer Chief from the White House and elect someone who knows how to make things work, instead of simply pandering for votes or rabble rousing. Being President takes more than having a catch campaign slogan such as "Yes We Can!" or "slow talking" the news of the Jimmy Fallon show.
I don't recall that anyone saw the Democratic Solution, 2,300 pages issued at 2 am, before the 9 am vote, which NOBODY read and yet they were compelled to vote on. The Bill was passed on a party line vote, but how many of those despicable Democrats even bothered to read the Bill they were voting on. Somehow our Nation has survived for the past 200+ years without ObamaCare?
Yes, there are thing we should do to improve our Nation's health care system, but ObamaCare is not the answer.
NOBAMA 2012!
If The Supreme Court rules one way...half of the country will claim " Judicial Activism"
If the Supreme Court rules the other way....the other half of the country will claim " Judicial Activism"
Backhouse "Here's Mr. Mike Earnest on being fired by Mitt Romney's Bain Capital"
Where's the proof that Romney 'made $100 million from shutting down that company'? Bain Capital makes its money from helping it's companies thrive and grow, like Staples - typically, venture capitalists LOSE money when they cannot make them efficient enough to survive.
I'm sure that all of the 70 million workers laid off under Obama's watch have a personal story to tell as well. Average new filings for unemployment (layoffs) have averaged about 400,000 per week, and for the 182 weeks since Obama took office, that's about 70 million workers.
Fortunately, the vast majority of them have been able to find new jobs (but not all, since we still have 1.3 million fewer people working than when Obama took office - according to the official government Bureau of Labor Statistics).
@Debbie To be fair you should ask that same question of President Obama who named Jeff Immelt as head of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board. GE is one of the top 10 companies that have outsourced jobs.
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/popups/exporting.america/content.html
http://www.dickmorris.com/
LMAO! Bain, bain, bain.... As an Iowan, many of us have already researvhed what private equity does, lots of wins for workers vs far fewer losses.
Folks, not every company makes the right decisions hence they call in private equity for help or because of their incompetency they become a target for a leveridged buyout by private equity or others.
-----------------------------------
Interesting on how backhouse wants to make an issue on the stage builders losing their jobs after the stage was completed when in reality this is an everyday event in the world of business, especially construction.
IE, if you don't have a contract for another job after one job is finished there will be layoffs.
It appears that FR lefties are more concerned with trying to promote an emotional argument vs trying to understand what it takes to create sustainability.
Every C level person I know, has had to make business decisions that involved peopled lives. My CEO,s last Quarterly meeting he told us all to stack and rate our people starting with contractors. Europe is wreaking havoc with our business, so people will be impacted. Thats life!
Debbie, here is a hint for you, romney doesn't need to show anyone how to outsource jobs overseas or domestically. Most businesses can look at available data to come to that decision.
ROY WILSON-336103
It would appear that Obama made a big mistake in pushing for 'Amnesty' for illegal immigrants. Before his 'Executive Order' (which could only last for 7 months), he led Romney or they were tied, but since then it has been downhill for Obama, as shown by the latest polling by Rasmussen (easily the most accurate pollster in the last 2 Presidential elections);
"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows Mitt Romney attracting 48% of the vote, while President Obama earns 43%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided."
ROY WILSON, you are wrong it's FOX-MUSSEN not Rasmussen.
Also, most polls have the the President going up.
Mike in DelRay -- I agree. I wonder if the ACA is declared unconstitutional how long it will take someone on this site to claim the Supreme Court made a decision based on racism?
The folks on here that are fighting affordable health care for all Americans, EITHER:
Are being paid to say it,
Or they can well-afford the cadillac of health care and could care less about anyone else,
Or they have crystal balls that tell them they will never get sick.
The vindictive behavior of extreme liberals in these comments show the guilt of fraud. Why would anyone call the supreme court, " a kangaroo court" unless they feel the law IS unconstitutional and speculate a likely outcome? Trying to discredit them ahead of a ruling would compare to obama trying to discredit the court, on his first day in office, knowing he had intentions of circumventing the constitution. The democrats are trying to squirm out of the mess they have created.
Ken/It isn't because SCOT-US is a kangaroo court nor because of doubts of the laws constitutionality.It is because ,with the Bush appointments of extreme right leaning judges, it is probably that it will be declared so. There is nothing wrong with attempting to cover all Americans with affordable, full health care.Most industrial nations have done so. The reason to have all of us in the system is simple,but necessary and only those persons who want it for nothing would see it differently. When we are young and healthy we would,with participation of our employers,be paying for coverage that we seldom,if ever use. As we become old we are likely to start to deteriorate,as far as health goes .Most fair minded people consider it the same as they do now. Pre-Paid health insurance, without the middle man excess profit taking . We also would have protection from overcharging as we would never see the bills. This is a normal piece of social security in most of the developed nations. We the American people have earned this advancement in our society and shouldn't be continued the denial of it.
listoire -
And Obama's apointees are extreme left. This means that overall, the Court is balanced.
Your point is?
I can't understand your logic of side stepping constitutional obligations like a third world dictator. In a democracy, leaders reach compromise and work togeather for a soloution. Health care is less achiveable now than it was four years ago. I pay 50% more today (less coverage, more deductable) than in 2008. Nothing has been done to make it affordable for 99%.
Powerful congressman accused of campaign finance violations
By Scott Bronstein and Drew Griffin, CNN Special Investigations Unit
Washington (CNN) -- Republican Rep. Vern Buchanan, a self-made Florida millionaire, is only in his third term in Congress, but he already is in charge of fundraising for the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee, and he sits on the powerful House Ways and Means committee.
But all that could be jeopardized. Federal investigations underway could result in Buchanan serving his next term behind bars.
CNN has confirmed there are no fewer than four congressional and federal investigations into Buchanan's business practices, his campaign finances and his alleged attempt to try to stop a witness from talking.
Kazran presented to CNN the same information, documents and testimony he has given to federal investigators. The two men had a falling out over their finances, and they've been suing each other for years. Buchanan says Kazran is a disgruntled partner and has lied about what happened.
At the center of Kazran's allegations is a cash swap scheme used to finance some of Buchanan's campaigns. He says employees were forced to write checks, then were reimbursed with cash drawn from Buchanan's car dealerships.
"It was to a point where I said, 'Chief, we can't give you this kind of money. At which point he said, 'Just run it through the corporation,'" Kazran said. "What he said to me was 'Get people to write a check to the campaign and then pay them back through the corporation.'"
Kazran did, and he was soon calling in managers, salesman, even assistants. People who never gave money to campaigns were suddenly writing big checks to Buchanan for Congress and, according to Kazran, getting reimbursed from the dealership. It added up to almost $70,000 at Kazran's dealership alone, he said.
"I remember one of the partners jokingly saying, 'Boss, you have all the money in the world. Why do you want us to pay you the money?' And he said, 'Well, it doesn't look good if it's coming from me.'"
Kazran took his detailed allegations to the Federal Elections Commission, which was already looking into Buchanan's campaign finances. Investigators there wanted to know not only about how the cash-swap scheme was set up, but if the congressman knew about it.
Kazran says there is no question the congressman knew all about it.
The FEC's initial report found "reason to believe" that Buchanan "knowingly and willfully violated" federal election laws. Read the initial FEC report (pdf).
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/22/politics/congress-buchanan-allegations/index.html?section=cnn_latest
______________________________________________________
Well now ain’t this just an eye opener this morning
Then you want to put that together with all the Elections Violations that more than probably occurred at Old Willard’s little soiree in Utah this weekend
Then you want to put that all together with all the Republican Governors trying to purge voters and suppress to vote in other ways that are patently illegal and amount to Voter Fraud.
And I’m supposed to believe that the Yahoo’s are going to hold the Attorney General in Contempt out of a firm sense of duty and patriotism.
Somebody done told a Whopper and I don’t believe it’s the Attorney General.
Good One IR!
From looking at all the posts recently, it sure looks like First Read is slowly evolving from a liberal rag to a conservative opinion blog! I can also see that shift on a national level... liberalism under Obama is declining and the once 'extinct' Conservative thought is making a comeback!
I've always been very proud of my country, I'm even prouder now!
miked....I think it is a case of rats jumping a sinking ship.....like the announcers at a football game praising the leading team.....so MSN is now rooting for Romney.....After this week's SCOTUS announcements this should escalate greatly
You are proud of GOP/Koch destruction of democracy and the constitution for the people.
You are in favor of a constitution for the corporations, and giving domestic and foreign corporations permission to buy up US democracy and our government (via Citizens' United).
You are in favor of overturning 200 years of U.S. founding principles.
Just admit to yourself and everyone on here, that you want a President that will do the bidding of the Kochs, the very wealthy and domestic and foreign corporations.
The Supreme Court Doubles Down on Citizens United: The Supreme Court just announced a 5-4 decision striking down Montana’s ban on corporate money in elections. The decision was handed down without hearing oral argument on the case, meaning that the five conservative justices were not even open to hearing arguments that their election-buying decision in Citizens United might have been wrongly decided.
We know...we know...the Supreme Court is just downright no good when they don't see things the same way you do.
But when they do, they are a wonderfully non-parisan group.
3 out of 4 shot down by SC on SB 1070. I'll betcha Jan Brewer is hitting the bottle a little earlier than normal...
"As early as today and as late as Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court will issue its ruling on the federal health-care law. And there are essentially three outcomes: 1) everything gets upheld, 2) everything gets struck down, or 3) something in between."
Brilliant reporting...... thank's for pointing out these possible outcomes to us idiots. How about this, don't publish stories like this until there is an actual decision so all us muttonheads don't get as confused as the staff at MSNBC.
tony-268769
We know...we know...the Supreme Court is just downright no good when they don't see things the same way you do.
But when they do, they are a wonderfully non-parisan group.
Nope, when they don't see things the way over half of Americans do they are no longer non-partisan. They are all Koched Up then.
Dennis,
The right-wingers on the Supreme Court had it in the Tank for trans-nationals, Big Money and the very wealthy when they voted for Citizens' United in 2010.
Buying up our government with secret unlimited cash, suppressing the vote, and changing the Constitution is what they are banking on.
The top one-tenth of one percent income earners are pulling out all the stops - to elect themselves a President who will do their bidding.
Dennis, Columbus:
That's really bad news. Some people had speculated that Roberts might be concerned with the damage his Citizens United decision had done to the country and might seek ways to repair it in other campaign financing cases. But if he ruled against Montana, it suggests that Roberts simply doesn't care how much damage he does in imposing his extremist ideology on the country, and won't hesitate to write some legal mumbo jumbo to overturn the Affordable Care Act. Why should he care how many people die because they can't get health insurance if it serves to advance the interests of the Republican Party and its corporate paymasters?
Houston,
These folks are rabid, and will go to any lengths to elect a 1%-er President.
They just want a President who has "enough digits" (Norquist):
To sign their Deregulate, Cancel-Taxes, Disenfranchize-the-Rabble Legislation, without a murmur from the rest of us.
Backhouse...
Sorry, I don't buy off on your protestations about the koch brothers influence or in fact anyones singular attempt at controlling our constitutional government (obama and company excepted).
I also don't buy off on yours an other FR lefties like IR and david walker trying to always trying to point the finger at the right, when in truth both sides have their faults and gaffes.
I would much rather have the SCOTUS protect us from having a government become so arrogant that they (congress and/or executive branch) need to try controlling the minutia of our lives.
BTW backhouse, best recheck what was actually the socio-economic conditions existing back when a small group of thinkers (our founding fathers) came up with and implimented a new constitutionally defined republic.
ie backhouse, over 80% of the population at that time were self-employed and that the rest worked for them. Out nation was founded on the concept that BUSINESS was part and parcel to the growth of America.
Now you think that government should control that growth? Perhaps you and other lefties can tell us about the successes that other countries have had in nationalizing the private sector?
LOL backhouse, obama is a 1% also. Talk about rabid, best go and get your annual rabies shot.
Regarding the SB1070 immigration ruling I am confused. The DOJ argument was basically the state can not make its own laws regarding federal policy ie. immigration. SCOTUS should understand the supremacy of federal law over state law in immigration matters. However, they rule in favor of the worst of the four issues under question.
The right for the police to take it upon themselves to check id and determine immigration status. Tell me, how can this be done other than through racial profiling? Do you think a cop will be "seeing" an undocumented Canadian vs. an undocumented Mexican?
Can't wait till a legal resident or an actual citizen is harrassed, falsely deported or detained. Can you say lawsuits? How will this "Police state" power grab square with the equal protection clause when a resident or citizen is affected?
Unfortunately the ruling will encourage the other dozen or so states to push their quasi racist, profiling agendas. Hopefully, the other cases from "pro immigrant groups" that focus on racial profiling can stop the racist profiling agenda of some states.
I for one would rather our Police go after criminals then try to determine immigration status.
This President has money in the bank from the books he wrote. As President, he is looking out for ordinary people.
Mitt Romney is looking out for the top 0n-tenth of 1% of Americans & has their financial backing.
Mr. Romney has multi-millions and potentially $Billions, from stripping down companies like the one in Marion, Indiana and shipping those jobs overseas.
Romney will not show his tax forms, and has refused to do so for decades. Nor will he show what he's got holed up in the Cayman Islands, or other places he has stashed his Bain Capital vulture dollars.
What we know for sure is Mitt Romney still receives $57,000 PER DAY - from Bain.
Backhouse - well said. Romney is in the pocket of big business and controlled totally by them. He has no ethics and is a total empty suit.
He can't talk about the programs his own campaign put together for him because he either doesn't understand them or hasn't bothered to read them.
He is an arrogant blunderer who cannot even talk in public without making a fool of himself. And someone thinks we should vote for this idiot for President? Get real!
Obama/Biden 2012
Beverly...
The Supreme Court doesn't make constitutional decisions based on the polled popularity of each issue. If they did, they would have trashed the horrid sausage known as the President's "Affordable Care Act" after the first day's court proceedings.
Seeking...
Are those the same reasons President Obama doesn't much talk about his own "programs" ??? When exactly was the last time he strung six sentences together regarding his healthcare reform mess ???
I wish msnbc would come up with a list of clones: people who keep opening multiple accounts and keep posting the same anti-Obama crap over and over....then people like miked and ac wouldn't get fooled by the numbers!
bayllie - I'm pretty sure that number would be very high. But, when you read the posts, you can see the same style - or lack thereof - in posts so you can easily figure out who is posting multiple times.
Amazing!
Amen bayllie!
Isn't too obvious for anyone who has a IQ higher then a rutabaga! The graduates from the Karl Rove University of blogging writing style is identical...
Then there's this;
• Post to get emotional responses from other
posters.
• Always post the same tired responses in response to the same tired topics.
• Never answer questions directed at them.
• Never justify their position.
• Always demanded documentary evidence from others to support their assertions,
while offering none in return.
• Always disappear if their bluff is called.
Which numbers, bay lie ? $16 trillion in national debt ?? Zero budgets in 3.5 years ??? How about 8.1% ++ in unemployment ???? How about $500 billion CUT from Medicare by Obama .... a so-called "savings" that was put to the CBO such that it was counted twice ..... only to later be debunked. How about $535 million, the amount of money Obama threw away on Solyndra ?????
Which numbers are you talking about baylilly ?
Feisty - hope your husband had a GREAT birthday!
He sure did! *wink wink*
He must have attended an 'Occupy' reunion !
tony - you talk like someone who would have first-hand knowledge. Me, I don't know anyone who participated in the "occupy" thing!
Seeking and Feisty,
it is obvious to us but not so much to those who get excited by the fake numbers; jim-1455434 is the best example. He either doesn't understand what he reads or he copies and pastes the same crap over and over because he has nothing else...
jim, read my post before writing. I quoted on purpose so people like you wouldn't get confused but apparently it's not hard to do for someone like you.
And for the millionth time, jimmy, let Solyndra go already. The #1 prober Issa let it go long time ago because he didn't want people like you to know that he is more tied into Solyndra than any Democrat including President Obama.
Feisty,
Happy Birthday to your husband! Mine has his in 2 weeks.
bay lie, I am looking for those quotes ..... OOPS ! Where are they ? Can you provide the comment reference # for me ? Did you LIE about the quotes ?
Oh, and Solyndra, here's the thing buttercup ..... Solyndra had received a "going-concern" letter from their independent CPA firm. In the business world, it is a financial "kiss of death" that essentially says DON'T LEND THEM MONEY because THEY ARE GOING BANKRUPT. So the Obama administration rushes right in, fast tracks the "investment" and U.S. taxpayers are on the hook for $535 million ! Or was it $537 million ?
Darn those pesky little numbers !
jim-1455434
jim, they quoted with people's nicks for crying out loud - WTF are you talking aboout that "I lied about the quotes"?????? YOU REPLIED TO MY POST: your post 3.23 - you shouldn't drink this early, jimmy, you keep getting confused.
again, how is that proving anything other than thatr the Republicans were either in it or are incompetent. According to your "smoking-gun" letter, this should have been a gift on the silver platter for the REPUBS. So which one is it, jim: incompetent Republicans or up to their knees in Solyndra-@!$%# Republicans?
Do you realize that more you write about Solyndra the worse you make the Republicans look? If Solyndra was so bad for the Democrats why nothing came out of Issa's probing, huh? Again, pick one:
a) Republicans are incompetent
b) Republicans were too involved with Solyndra's lobbyists - can't hide that Issa's smiling face on Solyndra lobbyists' invitations, can you jimmy?
No, baylilly.... If I was making Republicans look worse by bringing it up, you would not be having a cardiac arrest ..... spitting and sputtering as you trap yourself in your own "quotes" ..... or lack thereof ! You guys own that debacle as you own the other failed "green initiatives".
You keep trying desperately to throw dirt on Issa, when camapaign contributions flowed to the man in the White House.
jim, the only time you would make a point is if your Issa/Solyndra story was successful. it's dead - live with it.
You know ... I think a lot of people really do not care any more. What ever will be, will be. There has been so much hype over Obamacare and the elections, a lot of people are brushing it off. Yesterdays news which simply will not go away.
Business owners care, that's for sure. If this albatross passes it will cause health care costs to skyrocket falling into the laps of business owners. Hiring will stop.
A while back, I had a discussion with a 50 year old who hates President Obama and the Health Care Reform act, along with hatred of all progressive ideas. This fellow said “no way is hell would he let anyone force him to buy health insurance. “ So, my question to him was if he had a major accident or illness, that lets say cost $100,000 or more, what would he do? His answer, “go to the ER.”
Of course with additional questions of how he would you pay for this, his answer was to pay $20.00 a month. Of course my response was $20.00 a month was not going to satisfy the hospital or ever going to pay the bill. I went on to point out that such as a plan of action on his part flies in the face of what his far right friends believe in, and that he would be considered one of the dead beats he and his far right friends accuse the progressives of doing.
So, we can say any adult who doesn't want health care is not only a fool, but is pretty darn stupid.
I don't see this costing employers anything but some time looking at what insurance co. offers and than selecting the one he thinks will benifit his employees the best. Most employeers put themelves on salary for tax purposes. It is just a detail on his agenda to do so. It doesn't cost him anymore to do it.
Job1
What's even more remarkable is, I have neighbors who are die-hard Tea Party supporters - they even have a "Don't Tread On Me" flag waving outside their apartment - and I know for a fact these people are on Medicaid and food stamps - because are happy to tell you they (and only they) are entitled to these benefits, for God knows what reason.
6dogs...
It is all about how the costs affect their (businesses) ability to provide a product or service at a competitive price. Business wants to know the rules they must follow. IE how will the regs be written based on the legislation passed.
Obama and company screwed the pooch on writing thousands of pages of legislation (obamacare and financial reform) in less than a year only to see both not having all the specific rules being written and one having to be reviewed by SCOTUS over two years later.
Job1, once again you have shown your inability to connect the dots of your story to what you conclude...
Interesting that you think it was wrong for your subject to be willing to make monthly payments and that you failed to give his answer to your last question.
---------------------------
AmyB - sounds like you really have never asked them why. They seem to be the perfect candidates for progressive brain washing.
BTW, where is it written that only certain party types should receive government benefits if they qualify?
American 205
I believe what Job1 is saying is that he sees the hypocrisy of a person who espouses personal responsibility but then would suggest to not have insurance and go to the ER. Then the plan would be to pay a monthly payment that would be nowhere near the minimum required payment. I believe the minimum payment for a $100,000 bill would be slightly more than $20. Despite my support of a single payer system or at the very least a public option to increase competitive prices, you have to admit ACA and the mandate uses a "responsibility" approach to dealing with coverage.
The argument may become moot very quickly, but the Dems. should have dealt with the mandate differently. One big point against them is the fee if people don't buy insurance, could there have been a better way to include taxes vs. impose a fee? Could that have increased the chances against the Law being overturned?
Regarding brainwashing, to Amy's point some people are simply against ACA because it was sponsored and pushed by Democrats. They probably are the ones that said, "Get government out of all Health care," and "I love my Medicare, don't touch it."
Yellow...
I am wary of any major government program...when such programs are terribly and lightly explained, rushed through the system, and then hardly even mentioned by the very politicians who pushed thru their desired bill.
The "ACA" fits that model to a tee.
The little surprise that started a tempest with the Catholic Church would only be the first of many surprises when poorly described plans are pushed thru against the will of the majority of Americans. The tax imposed on any and all implanted medical devices was another. And that still leaves about 2998 pages of muck to deal with.
And you are correct...some folks would simply be "against ACA because it was sponsored and pushed by Democrats". However, the converse is also true...many on this website would use that very same reason to support 'ACA". Neither reason is right. And neither party is innocent of supporting things because of political party.
4#6/ Your comment on people being unwilling to make monthly payments.Don't you make payments to your Insurance co. to cover your costs of medical obligations now?
looking at the picture of the Supreme Courts facility it looks like it is getting a "makeover". Am I correct?
Obama is not part of the 99% nor does he give a rat's @ss about them either. He would much rather hobknob with the Hollywood elite. His support of the "99%" is mearly campaign speak. His actions and results show that he is decimating the middle class while playing the blame game. Every President has fought opposition from the other party. You can't blame the Republicans for his failures. The "party of no" has been either the democrats or republicans depending on who the president is and it hasn't changed in over 200 yrs.
@Lloyd, respectfully you forgot about how much the Replicans love the filibuster.
Lloyd,
Please list what actions Republicans have taken to help the middleclass, since they took over many state legislatures and the House in 2010.
In Maine, under a Tea Party governor, 23,000 people were cut from Medicaid and the "savings" passed on to the wealthiest citizens. Is that what you mean by helping the 99%?
obama acts like a rockstar.....he likely has a bowl of M&Ms that has all the red one removed...and no I have no proof of the M&Ms
Lloyd - your comment has no substance since the GOP decided - right after the 2008 election - to oppose EVERYTHING Obama proposed - to hell with the US and to hell with us. The GOP has been treasonous and you want to blame Obama. Of course you do - that's all the Republican party can do. You've got no candidate - just an empty suit who also doesn't give a damn about this country.
American Citizen - your comment is as empty as your candidate!
Obama/Biden 2012
Lloyd S-3714865
Every President has fought opposition from the other party. You can't blame the Republicans for his failures. The "party of no" has been either the democrats or republicans depending on who the president is and it hasn't changed in over 200 yrs.
Except President Obama
No other president has experienced blatant racism as President Obama. Remember when Mitch McConnell said in October 2010 that his party's primary goal in the next Congress was to make Obama a one-term president?
The GOP/teabaggers have no credibility when you factor in their witch hunts, unprecedented opposition, overt hate, and bigotry.
ROFL
Despite GOP/T-bagger rants...The GOP Is Unbelievably Full of Sh!t on Executive Privilege!!!!
The Fox News wing of the Republican Party (which is to say, the Republican Party), has concluded that Barack Obama is a 21st Century Richard Nixon because he conjured a dreaded, wicked trick called executive privilege to cover up his manifest crimes. Hey, only Republicans are allowed to do that!
I'm allowed to say that because that's how I felt about Reagan's use of it to keep then-Supreme Court nominee William Rehnquist's Justice Department memos secret, and George H.W. Bush's use of it to prevent Defense Secretary Dick Cheney from handing over documents about Pentagon cost overruns, and Bill Clinton's use of it to hide his reflexive lies and monstrous appetite for intern-flesh, and George W. Bush's use of it (six all told) to cover up his various scandals. Every president since Kennedy has invoked executive privilege in one form or another. George W. Bush first did it on his 334th day in office. It took Obama 1,240.
http://gawker.com/5920526/the-gop-is-unbelievably-full-of-@!$%#-on-executive-privilege?tag=fast-and-furious
Beverly, how humorous when you say...
After reading yours and other lwnj's posts for nearly two years you could teach the right a thing or two about witchhunts, opposition, really overt hate and bigotry. Why even in early 2011 you reveled in telling me that you were a racist.
AmyB, why are you afraid to post the link that supports what you say...
Amy -- the social security reduction generally affects all private sector workers.
America lots of #s
You are a LIAR. I never told you I am a racist.
bev -- interesting response. you state that you never told America lots of #s you are a racist.
many here are called racists simply because they disagree with many of President Obama's policies. It is an insult and a lie.
you now may understand how wrong it is to declare someone a racist because they do not agree with your opinions.
You do realize that the "Hollywood elite" made their money? No one is born a movie star. No one inherits a star on the walk of fame. It may not be the hardest work in the world, and the perks are awesome, but it isn't a trust fund. You still have to earn it. Unlike most of the 1%....
Naturally and always inevitably...we get back to the simple rant of "racism"...the six letter word designed to end all possible debates.
So I guess the President is doing a lousy job of leading the country because of all the racists who are out there.
Good to know.
lol bev, no reason for me to lie. especially when many of your posts shows it to be true.
Bottomline is it should not be legal to force someone to purchase healthcare coverage so that illegals can get healthcare services for free. Fix the illegal problems first and then work towards real solutions to cover those americans who can not afford healthcare coverage. My household spends $5500 a year now to feed and educate a child in our local school district. I know some of that money is going towards educating illegals anchorbabies, we have no kids and never will, why cant the parents who have the kids pay more for schooling them and then our household could purchase some healthcare? Oh I see, its ok to take from my pocket but not ok to take from your pocket.
If the HC stands, it actually will work out better for my household if we take advantage like so many do. We could get divorced, I could work in the family business for no pay, live with my ex-wife and get food stamps, free healthcare and a free cell phone. May as well take advantage like so many others do.
Yep, people living in desperate poverty sure do have it easy.
The law states, that hospitals cannot turn away sick or injured people, even if they cannot pay for their care. Why are providers forced to give away their services, and individuals are not required to have insurance they will, almost inevitably, need to pay for their healthcare?
I have no doubt you actually may " live with my ex-wife and get food stamps, free healthcare and a free cell phone. May as well take advantage like so many others do."
In my experience, the Tea Party folks are the biggest consumers of free services, in the spirit of "if undeserving scum get these things for free, than I, an upright citizen, should too!"
NO! Don't do it! Millions of liberals/illegals rely on US the working middle class, to pay for the entitlements they deserve as Americans. Keeping the MIDDLE CLASS quality of life low due to over taxation so they can have healthcare, education, food, and everything else is OUR JOB, the MIDDLE CLASS supports this crap that the liberals love so. I say pay your own way, or eat out of a dumpster. I don't care, I want to send my son to the best schools, but can't afford to because I am forced to take care of some deadbeat welfare lazy a-holes. Nice America......
JJ-johnnyreb2874187 - I believe you'll find more far righties living on the entitlements - no liberals. But, you don't like to admit the truth!
There is no doubt in my mind you could walk past a child or family eating out of a dumpster - because their family had fallen on hard times - and not care at all. But, that says so much more about you than it does about the quality of those people and nothing it says is good.
I'll bet you're a Christian, too - right? Yeah! Right!
Obama/Biden 2012 - because the far right has no values left at all.
I live in Detroit, I can tell you that I know of NO conservative or right leaning people abusing UE or SS. Your going to jump right to the race issue, because there is no way for you to keep yourself from that link. Its inbred into your thought process. I do know several people who lost their jobs and are working their way back using services designed for this, and I know a lot of people who for generations have lived off of SS and UE along with food stamps/Bridge cards.The reason why Detroit is where it is .....is because of people scamming the system for years and years. Ive heard people scream.....there is no such thing as a welfare queen. But its not that hard to find here in Detroit, all you need to do is offer another stimulus like the $1500 that was offered a few years back and people will line up to take the money. The last one required a form filled out on a special yellow paper, people went out and photo copied the form on regular paper and were selling it to their own neighbors for $20.
jollyoldsoul1 - so you go ask everyone getting food stamps whether they are Republican or Democrat? Amazing! I haven't jumped to any race issue but you seem intent on doing so. Pitiful aren't you?
I know people who have lost their jobs and had to work hard to get though tough times - both Democrat and Republican as well as Independents.
You know a lot of people who have lived off SS and UE for generations? You need to get better friends don't you?
Now run along because your post doesn't say or prove anything!
Seeking sanity...
How elitist of you for your post means so little itself. Get better friends indeed...
Jollyoldsoul. I have a niece (adopted as a foster child) who thinks nothing of scamming the system for all it is worth. She continually amazes my sister with the efforts she uses to continue collecting.
LOL sanity, it is all the rights/christians fault! Just another example of you typing without engaging your brain.
Maybe Harry (the certified BS artist) will tell us if this is before or after he came back from serving in Viet Nam! lol
american - you have yet to post anything that makes sense. And, engaging your brain would be useless since clearly you are only half prepared in that arena.
You truly are a good little Republican. Nothing of value to say but you say it freely!
And you've proved my point so beautifully - your niece is taking full advantage of entitlement programs. Don't need to say anymore!
Obama/Biden 2012
Obviously, I am not an attorney because I cannot understand how the government can draft you, compel you to fight in a war you do not agree with and make you pay taxes at the same time to pay for it and there is no doubt about its ability to do that. However, it cannot make you have health insurance? I am not saying the new health care is good or bad I am just sayings I don't understand the logic of the law.
The decision is not logical and has nothing to do with people. It has to do with business profits.
Since you asked, the draft and compulsion to fight as a drafted/enlisted soldier are covered by the war powers clause. Taxation is covered by the taxation and spending clause. These are both enumerated Congressional powers. Congress arguably could make all of us have health insurance as a tax (single payer), but it would have to comply with the tax clause (apportionment, etc.) and it would violate O's promise not to raise taxes on the middle class. This is why the mandate was styled as an exercise of Congressional power to regulate interstate commerce under the commerce clause.
Short answer, it could arguably be achieved under a different set of Congressional powers as set forth in the Constitution. In order for you to understand the logic of the law, you will need to start with the premise that the federal government's powers are limited to those provided for in the Constitution. Then, you will need to research the nature and extent of those powers. In the end, you'll be a better informed citizen for taking the time to learn all of this. Happy studying.
Or, while capable of being drafted, you cannot drink a beer.
Lo and behold, upheld as a tax under the taxation and spending clause. So much for the promise of not raising taxes on the middle class, but the mandate survives.
Now who is Obama's Jobs Czar? Is it Jeff Immelt? Did Romney force him to outsource jobs to China? Let's hear from some of you democrat-communists on this .
This is where the dems are over the cliff. Bain is the only company that outsourced jobs? What at total crock of horse apples. Every major corporation in the US has done this to stay competitive, and union manufactureing is a major contributor to being non-competitive.
American Citizen - not over the cliff at all. We just aren't willing to elect someone who thinks it's a great idea to send jobs to China and India instead of working to keep them in the US. Yes, there are many corporations in the US - not EVERY major corporation but many - who have outsourced jobs. Their leadership is not running for President.
See how that works???
Obama/Biden 2012
5-4 Conservative. Take health care away from poor kids and allow the rednecks to continue drawing off medicaid without putting into the system, even though they can afford it. The delay was probably to give the SCOTUS members time to load up on pharmaceutical stock.
racist comment
I think there is a good chance Roberts will be the fifth vote to uphold the entire health care law. He is trying very hard to overcome the suspicion that Americans have held for 12 years, that the Supreme Court is motivated by politics, rather than the law. Obviously, Scalia and Thomas are not budging, but I think Roberts may come around, since this will be remembered by history as the Roberts Court.
It may even be 6-3 if he can convince Alito. Legally speaking, this is no less Constitutional than requiring people to pay into social security or medicare, or making people have homeowners or auto insurance. In addition, even if conservatives try to make an argument that such a law has never been passed, that doesn't make it per se unconstitutional. Social Security was a new idea when it was passed.
How is it racist?
Keck, Please!
"redneck" when used against someone, as in comment #10, is a racial slur.
sorry.
blearyeyed
How is it racist?
That's HYSTERICAL! Of cooourse, the Unfair & Unbalanced Fox Nation, the obstustionist GOP.
unhinged T-baggers.
Oh, I forgot to add Darrel Issa.
FACE IT, THE supreme court will kill it, and then we will never ever have government health care in this nation, just like we will never ever have campaign finance reform and soon the gop will be our one and only party, just like the communist party is the only one in china
We are taxed enough already, stop obamacare, secure the borders, minimize the government, become a great country like days past....
A very foolish tea party stance!
How is this foolish? If you care so much about the 99% then why would you support tax increases? OH yeah, "progressives" believe that all of our problems can be solved by raising taxes on the 1%.
yeah back to when the dems ran everything, didnt take long for agop congress to make the nation go to hell, ever since newt and reagan started running things, 2 american traitors
You people live in that republican bubble in which actual facts don't get in. It's crazy!
Bobmike-
"Days past" - like the days of Eisenhower when the top marginal tax rate was 70%? When the wealthy actually paid their fair share and we invested in infrastructure like the interstate highway system? When we had a strong middle class with fair wages for a fair days work?
You can't have it both ways, say we are "taxed enough already" then wish for greatness "like in the days past.
Paying taxes is not the inherent evil modern Republicans want you to believe. Even General Washington raised taxes to pay for the American Revolution.
The orignial Tea Partiers protested against taxation without representation, NOT just the fact they had to pay tawes.
Raising taxes for GOOD things would anger no one. Raising taxes for entitlements and to pay for illegals to get an education and such, wasting on failed green energy, Not ending the war in Afghanistan, and now health care? Cut the Crap! We Are taxed enough already! CUT THE CRAP! Then we can magically pay for stuff. Craziness.....
Just when I think I've heard everything. . .
Amy, in what alternate universe can a GENERAL raise taxes to pay for ANYTHING? Cause, here in the real world, that cannot happen in these United States. For you to state that Washington, as a General and leader of the Army, raised taxes to pay for the Revolution is outright ludicrous.
First of all, it did not happen.
Second,it could not happen.
You must not have done so well in fourth grade history class.
no joe - I'm guessing you didn't even make it to fourth grade so you probably should not talk. Nothing you write has an logic to it and nothing is backed by facts - just your incessant rantings.
No Jo, I'm sorry, I assumed everyone understood that General Washington became the first President of the United States. Here is your history lesson for the day. Read the whole thing, it's filled with ironies.
Amy,
In my experience, the Tea Party folks are the biggest consumers of free services, in the spirit of "if undeserving scum get these things for free, than I, an upright citizen, should too!"
Tea Party Members are the biggest consumers? I find that hard to believe, do you have any stats on that?
Seeking Sanity,
Amy - TeeHee!
Huh! Which part of what she said was not understandable or true? Or was it the fact that she said anything? Im guessing you have your beak so far up the red headed ones ample buttocks that you cant even see its daytime.
Amy, dear, you did not say "as president, Washington raised taxes to pay for the Revolution"- you said, General Washington did so- which is outright ludicrous.
Second, your Wiki version of the Whiskey Rebellion leaves out some important facts-
These excise taxes were imposed to clear all debt of the newly won United States-not simply those accrued during the Revolution, but the costs of setting up the government, building Washington D.C., paying the salaries of the three branches of government- all the costs of doing business as a government.
There were some pretty hot disputes between Hamilton, the formulator of the plan, who wanted the USA to become an economic powerhouse, and had his own ideas of how to achieve that end; and Jefferson, who wanted this new country to grow within its own continent, but to exist as a bastion of liberty in isolation as much as was possible. Essentially, Hamilton and Jefferson disagreed on whether this new country would have a strong, or weak, central government. Their disagreement became extremely hostile- the end result of which was Jefferson resigned from Washington's cabinet, and Jefferson and Washington never spoke again. The Whiskey Rebellion, put down by a Federal militia, proved to Jefferson that he had lost that round of the argument; this served as the linchpin of the estrangement between the two.
Your simplistic, and badly stated, first post actually showcases your ignorance of early American history- your second post backs that up.
Perhaps instead of mooning over pictures of Obama, you might read some history of the United States.
no joe - and your understand of history is seriously lacking substance and stated poorly - to say the least.
Perhaps before you put Amy down you should realize you are posting nonsense - and in poor fashion. But I'm sure you think it is just the best post ever! Please! Have you ever studied anything beyond high school history? Your assumptions and summation are truly pathetic and have no basis in fact.
seeking -- please share where the post by no joe is historically inaccurate and why here summation is pathetic.
Because its her, thats it! Thats all seeking has!
billybob & jollyold - I don't have to. Amy already did that - and very well.
Oh, I might add that President Eisenhower was still referred to by many as General Eisenhower. It's not uncommon so Amy referring to General Washington was not improper.
President Eisenhower was still referred to by many as General Eisenhower.
Thanks Seeking Sanity!
And...how many Presidents have ridden at the head of an army to 'suppress the insurgents?'
It's a political decision intended to give the top 1% more profits. Period. The health of the American people has nothing to do with it.
Blah blah blah. Same liberal drivil. The evil 1%. I'm so sick of this class warfare crap I could puke. Stop blaming others. No one in politics gives a $hit about the "99%". If you're not happy with your lot in life, make better decisions.
If Liberals Hated America we’d VOTE Republican.
Obama-Biden 2012!
You just stated that you hate America! Your voting for the worst President ever Obama! Anybody but Obama in 2012!!! This jerk is a liar! And no I am not a Tea Partier or a Republican but a former Democrat! That has had my eyes opened by this liar in chief! You are just going to vote for Obama because your a Democrat and can't think for yourself!
For the ones that are thick, please read slowly. If Liberals Hated America we’d VOTE Republican!
Lloyd-
Hate to burst your bubble, but class warfare has been going on a long time. Reagan escalated class warfare on the middle class wth his "trickle down" economic theory, and declared war on the poor with his "welfare queen" myth.
The Middle Class lost that war,by the way.
Nancy - you are clearly the one who hates the United States (America is actually more than the US) since you'd consider voting for Romney who has put forth NOTHING to show he even understands what is going on today! Your ignorance is shown in the rabid rantings of your post.
You've never been a Democrat in your life and don't even have a clue about what is going on. I'm a registered Independent and have voted for both parties in the past. I would no more consider voting for Romney than I would you because clearly neither of you has the intelligence to push a broom much less lead the country.
Obama/Biden 2012
How do you know if she was previously a Democrat or not ? Then you cite her "ignorance" .... LOL !
How's about toning down the personal attacks ? Do you think you could get your message across without resorting to such "flamethrowing" remarks ??
Nope....... he/she/it can not!
If the Supreme Court rules that government can't force people to buy insurance, I'm cancelling my car insurance the next day.
Good luck with that!
I wouldn't do that unless you'd like a big ticket from your local police. States can force you to buy car insurance and health insurance, if they so choose. The issue before the Supreme Court is whether the federal government (not the states) can make such requirements. An important difference worth your researching before taking any rash actions.
That's a state issue, not a federal one.
States are still bound by the U.S. Constitution. They can't violate federal laws, or take away rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. All states can do is grant more rights.
You are correct, except your last sentence. Is your state legislature engaged solely in the business of granting more rights or are they also regulating all sorts of intrastate activities (such as driving)?
LIABILITY Insurance is required to protect those you may hit and do damage upon.
Collision Insurance is usually required as long as there is a lien holder with a "secured interest". Once the car note/truck note is paid-off, you are not required to carry collision insurance..... that is the risk YOU bear.
This "car insurance argument" has been debunked so many times, I'm surprised you bring it up !
After the way this High Court has acted in its own members best interest and not We the Peoples I believe they have been HIGH!
Justices WE CAN SEE YOU, your crimes while over looked by your cronies is pretty obvious to the rest of us!
The Best Darn Court the Koch Brothers can buy!
The Supreme Court is the best reason to vote for Obama in 2012.
Why, what can Obama do? Will he use "executive privalege" to overturn the decision?
Yes, Obama's right to appoint successive justices is extremely necessary to continue the progress this country needs to regain our standing in the world.
A country as rich as ours shouldn't be relitigating culture wars; but should be focused on the long term, strategic goals that position us for whatever may come.
Personally, I'd love to see a few more 'signing statements'. They were SO popular in the last administration, let's bring 'em back for an encore!
the democrats could have focused on jobs in the first two years of obama...instead the focused on obamacare.
...they could have passed an infrastructure bill with control of the house and senate....the democrats had total control....republicans couldnt stop them at the time (if they could have...they would have stopped obamacare, which is unconstitutional anyway)
the democrats wasted the chance they had......on obamacare, when they could have put lots of out of work americans to work. if americans were working...they may have re-elected obama.
House Republican jobs bills: under 10
House Republican bills seeking to limit womens' control over their bodies: more than 600.
This urban legend is in line with the "blame Bush" excuse. The Democrats did not have a "filibuster-proof" majority. Everything proposed was opposed and/or filibustered such as closing Gitmo, health care reform, financial protections bills, stimulus, etc. Infrastructure? The GoP has opposed anything that smacks of providing jobs.
bi-partisan house "jobs" bills since feb 2011 14
...only to get to harry reids desk....and sit.
we know sacred, but the gop never believes facts and truths, they live on limbaugh/hanity, fox news daily lies and fables, always have always will, science and reality is beyond what their puny little brains can handle
Obamacare is what drove the political wedge so deep between the parties. The president, full of his delusions of a mandate, ignored the fact that half of the county did not want his health care plan and pushed forward. The result is a country that is bitterly divided. Had he spent the first 2 years of his presidency focusing on the economy and infrastructure he would be walking into his 2nd term.
Skup-
That is completely untrue, the "political wedge" was manufactured and driven by Republicans.
It was driven by Rush and his pre-inauguration announcement that he hoped Obama would fail.
It was driven by Republican leaders meeting shortly after the inauguration to plan how they would obstruct President Obama's agenda.
It was driven by Republican Congressional leaders saying their NUMBER ONE PRIORITY was to make Obama a one-term president.
President Obama tried to develop a bi-partisan approach to healthcare reform, which is why he included the individual manadate and other provisions. Republicans refused to "play nice".
If the ACA is such a monstrosity and everyone hates it, why are the majority of the provisions expected to survive even if it is declared unconstitutional?
w
keck - we go through this at least once a week but - again - President Obama did not have a filibuster proof Congress except for a short 7 months - during which time Ted Kennedy was ill so did not vote and there were several recesses. After that, everything he tried to do was blocked by the GOP.
See how that works? Again....
Obama/Biden 2012
seeking -- a new excuse from Obamatron Central?
So it is all Ted Kennedy's fault because he had the audacity to get sick and die!! And that is why President Obama cannot get anything done.
Lmao....... Seeking is like an ex wife! Always right, but it doesnt matter because there is nothing that can be done about it.
jollyoldsoul - and you probably have lots of exes. You've got nothing to argue with so you attack me - why is that not surprising?
billybob - totally ignorant post and you know it. But, you have no points to argue so you go with stupidity. So becoming....
I have 3 as a matter of fact. And I dont "attack" people for nothing. When someone makes a point or share's their opinion as if its a fact and uses that "opinion" to make another blogger look wrong or silly, sure I will comment. Your posts just happen to be easy targets. Clay pigeons for blind people!
jollyoldsoul1 - now why doesn't 3 exes surprise me?
Obviously Feisty Redhead is a Democrate hack that works for MsNBC, that is why the comments are always first on any given day.
No, they probably just have an RSS feed.
And really who cares.....he/she/it gets collapsed so fast its not funny!
Go SCOTUS throw out this worthless piece of Legislation called OBAMACARE!!!!
So, we can say any adult who doesn't want health care is not only a fool, but is pretty darn stupid.
End medicaid for people who could have bought insurance and didn't.
Have either of you two idiots read the bill? Of course not, no one has. This is Obama's "legacy" when he had control of the house and senate. Pass a 1000 page bill that was voted party line despite the fact that no one had time to read it.
This bill is better than no bill. The GOP should have gotten off their A$$e$ and done something as far as heath care reform.
Trying to pass a health care reform bill that adds huge amounts of spending to the federal government while in the midst of the worse recession in decades isn't exactly smart. The President figured he would only have two years before losing one of the houses and moved forward anyway. Bad decision. The end result is country divided about as bad as it has been since the civil war.
Come on, Job1, try to come up with something more original than the same cut-and-paste over and over again.
You mooching democrat-communist slugs better stop knocking the Republicans. They are the people that provide jobs and pay for your miserable existence.
Since when, no d um a $$ republican is my superior, most cant even read and write
That was the STUPIDEST f'n comment I've seen on here in weeks. Congratulations. *rolling eyes*
commieslayer - and you better stop bashing working middle/class, your wealth buddies would never get richer if we did not work like dogs for pentance while they rob the bank, cause everyone knows repugnants are as lazy as the day is long.
PS - you got a little problem in the south buddy - the SBC(Southern Baptist Convention) and Bubba will never vote for a Morman. I know this because I've lived in Bubbaland all my life and Mit is getting very little attention here these days, no bumper stickers anywhere and the TN gop is concentrated on trying to save the seats in the state legislature they re-carved. Sure is fun to watch, hope they sink theselves in all that greed.
Union Baby--- Are you Southern Baptist? I am and most of the parishioners in my church will be voting for Romney over Obama.
I chose not to put a Romney bumper sticker on my car this year in respsonse to the 2008 election. My husband had a McCain sticker on his car and was nearly run off the road (with our children in the car) by an Obama supporter who passed him shouting obscenities and using obscene hand getures. So, we choose not to subject ourselves again to such risky behaviors. Don't worry though, we still support Romney via political contributions.
karen-
Seriously? You live in the south, and you are afraid of having a Romney bumpersticker because of the evil Obama supporters? Sorry, can't buy it.
Everybody that drives by me in a hurry, cuts me off, and gives me the finger has either a "McCain/Palin" sticker or an old "W" sticker on their car.
I think outside of the major cities anyone in the South that has an Obama bumper sticker on their car is likely to have their car vandalized.
commieslayer
You mooching democrat-communist slugs better stop knocking the Republicans. They are the people that provide jobs and pay for your miserable existence.
LOL, now that is facial.
commieslayer - you actually are an idiot. I work for a Democrat who owns my business. I have worked for many Democrats and a few Republicans. I sit on the board of two companies and I hate to burst your bubble but one board has more Democrats and the other one is just about even. Your stupidity is showing. You should probably stay off Faux News if you actually want to get facts!
What an idiot!
Karen - the people of your church may say they'll vote for Romney but when they go in the booth - if they even go - they'll never pull the lever for a Mormon! Get real!
Obama/Biden 2012 because the ignorance of the far right will destroy this country!
Wow ! Once again, SeekingSanity is calling people an idiot .... then repeating it !!
Is there any chance at all that you could just present your opinion WITHOUT the personal assaults ? Do you really think everyone who has a different opinion from you is stupid, or an idiot or whatever other insult you can hurl ??
Most businessmen I know are Republican.
jim - then you clearly know very few businessmen. That doesn't really matter, does it?
Nice try. As a practicing CPA for many years, I worked countless audits, reviews and compilations which included doing corporate tax returns and partnership returns. In the course of doing this work, you get to know your clients quite well.
As usual, you seek to attack the messenger instead of listening to the message.
While I don't entirely agree with the message in #20, your reply in #20.7 is full of venom and intolerance !
jim - again, you clearly know few businessmen/women. Many are Democrats - if you don't know them, too bad.
Your post makes no sense. So, try again if you want.
Again, you attack the messenger. But then again, I am not sure I would expect it to make sense to you ..... you frequently what you do not understand.
In #20.8, I said MOST businessmen I know are Republican. You try to say I don't make sense .... but then you back down to "many". LOL ! Your arguments are as strong as a wet paper bag !!
jim - there was no attack there. Clearly reading comprehension is not your strong suit (now that's an attack).
I stated that many businessmen/women and actually most that I know are Democrats. Again, you have no arguments so you attack me.
Little jimmy - you're pathetic!
Good middle of the road decision on both Obama care and Arizona's immigration laws:
Strike down the mandatory purchase of health insurance. Uphold the Arizona laws that enforce the nation's immigration laws.
Since this Obamacare was President Obama's "signature" legislation, and if it gets gutted, or completely thrown out, what has he got left to point to?? A complete waste of four years.
Even Obama's name will enter general usage as a synonym for incompetence, poor money management, blame throwing. What a silly legacy to leave office with. No honor, no lasting wisdom, just shame.
Time to ditch this disgusting Kenyan dog-eater and elect a REAL President. Time for Mitt Romney for the next eight years.
of course the gop has to hate health care, it actually helps someone other than a millionaire or billionaire, we cant have that you selfish greedy you know whats, you will all burn some day!!!
Joseph E. Parent - don't you ever get tired of showing how totally ignorant you are? The Kenyan stupidity tells everything about you! Pitiful excuse for a human being - you!
Don't you ever get tired of personal attacks upon those you disagree with ?
What he says about Obama is no worse than some of the "stuff" you put down about Romney !
jim - no, I have never implied Romney is anything but a US Citizen. I have never called him a name like communist. Do you understand now? Anyone who resorts to that stupidity is Stupid! Get it? I can say things about Romney's leadership - he has none - without resorting to lies. Most of you however, can't resist the gutter-stupidity of "kenyan" or "communist" - it's all ya got!
True or False ...... Barack Obama's father was Kenyan ? You can read whatever "implications you choose" or you can read what is written, but just because you try ever so desperately to "read between the lines" .... that does not mean that ANYTHING is there !
YOU launched into a personal attack because you did not like what he said. It happens. Grow up a little.
jim - I see I'm on your stalker list again today. Grow up!
And, jim, doesn't matter what Obama's father was - he was born in the US and is as much as US citizen as anyone else. He is NOT Kenyan. Period.
I am hoping republicans have some solution to this health care mess if it is defeated. I have not heard them say anything except they would allow insurance companies to sell across state lines. That does not seem to be any position worth arguing about. It cannot be the cost because we finished deregulating the financial markets under G.W. and fought two wars without paying for them and in fact, lowered taxes at the same time. That tells me that conservatives are not opposed to spending money we don't have. It is just an argument over what we spend it on.
Ron,
The only solution I want to hear from the GOP is a statement stating that the Federal Govt has no Constitutional authority to meddle in decisions individuals and families make regarding their health care choices.
Can you cite the financial deregulation bill(s) signed by Bush?
As to tax cuts, we had record tax revenues under Bush and income tax collections were a larger percentage of GDP under Bush than during the Eisenhower years when the top marginal tax rate was 90%
Larry Robinson-1323081 - I've never been able to get someone to list out an actual financial deregulation bill. I'm guessing they lose interest when they find that most of them were enacted while Clinton was still in office.
I'm sorry Larry, but attributing record tax revenues to tax cuts is some pretty "fuzzy math". You can't pay for something with nothing. If you look at the historical data, most any president could claim record tax revenues. Additionally, tax revenues were slightly decling from 2000 to 2004, started to climb again in 2005 and then took a sharp curve downward in 2009. We all know what happened in 2009 don't we?
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=203
Sorry, but "that dog don't hunt".
OilmanMD - I noticed that you didn't actually cite any deregulation bills.
One thing that does make me wonder is that an individual is required by law to have automobile insurance but making Health Insurance mandatory is unconstitutional? We as a nation don't make much sense sometimes. Can someone logically explain this. Aw wait a minute you can't
Might be that driving a car is a privilege. You can always walk, or ride a bike!
Sgt - auto insurance is a state by state requirement, not federally imposed in the first place. In the second place, you do not HAVE to have auto insurance. If you want to drive a car you do, but if you chose to walk, ride public transit or a bike, you do not HAVE to have auto insurance.
That is the main difference - Obamacare demands that you purchase health insurance just for being alive. The federal government cannot require you to purchase any product as an end result of you simply being in existence.
Driving is a choice. You don't have to buy auto insurance if you don't want. Take the bus or train. This bill mandates purchase with no choice. That is the difference.
Car ins is mandated by the state, which has different powers. Also driving is a privilege & a choice. You do not have to have it unless you want a car on the road as opposed to the health ins mandate which requires you to have it simply because you are alive.
Typical unsound rant against Obamacare. So please explain to the rest of us why we should have to cover your medical costs because you aren't in the mood to buy insurance? Here is an idea - you don't have proof of payment when you need medical attention, you are denied medical services and you die. That is after all, the GOP/TP preferred method.
So, we can say any adult who doesn't want health care is not only a fool, but is pretty darn stupid.
But Lloyd you can't force people to take the bus or train. People want to own their fancy cars and drive whereever they please. Public transportation is mostly available in the big cities. Most folks need a car to get around. It's a circular argument. Besides, who wouldn't want to have health insurance?
Job1 and Sacred Fire
I'm 63 years old and I don't have health insurance- I was raised just fine without it; I raised my kids without it.
I don't believe in doctors and the form of medicine they practice. I refuse to participate in this moronic and unconstitutional infringement on my liberty
Exactly, now I want none of my tax dollars going to entitlement programs.
Do you understand the difference between a State and Federal mandate?
pinkfloyd111 "Exactly, now I want none of my tax dollars going to entitlement programs."
What are you calling an entitlement program?
Larry Robinson-1323081,
You say: "I refuse to participate in this moronic and unconstitutional infringement on my liberty."
But what about the infringement you are placing upon a homosexuals liberty?
Why should an infringement concerning your healthcare matter to anyone, when the infringement on the rights and liberties of the homosexual comunity does not matter to you?
As soon as you allow just one person's rights to go unnoticed, then your rights at some point may go unnoticed as well. Allowing someone to take a person's rights away is allowing others to take your rights away…..think about it, and let the way you are feeling right now, be a lesson learned.
Concerning this issue, it all has to do with the God almighty dollar and saving some expenses on medicare and medicaid.
Why don't we require people to buy home/renter's insurance? Didn't the federal govt have to pay for Katrina victims who had no insurance? Let's mandate that.
How about mandating people buy disability insurance. That way, if they get sick and miss work, they won't need federal assistance to pay their bills.
Why stop at just mandating health insurance. Mandate everything so the feds don't have to pay for everyone else.
If one chooses to walk, ride a bike or take mass transit, one can collapse or fall off their bike, be rushed to the ER and IF that person has no health insurance, those of us who do PAY for their care. Conservatives speak about how important individual responsibility is but yet they are perfectly happy allowing free-loaders to increase the cost of their own health care simply because they choose not to have insurance or cannot afford it. Conservatives speak with forked tongue.
The government only cares about what they are spending. They don't care about what the American public must spend to survive.
I have been a holisic natural healer for over twenty years and although I do have health insurance, I have only used it once when I broke my ankle in 2009.
Kind of ironic that Obama, the "constututional law professor" is having to sweat it out, not knowing if his signature piece of legislation is going to be considered constitutional.
Guess he was as bad at constitutional law as he is at governing
that affirmative action thing is doing wonders for this country.
MOMINNJ,
This is what happens with Affirmative Action. Minorities enjoy grade inflation. I saw this first hand at Indiana University in the early "80's Some minorities would never have graduated if held to the same standards as whites. At the time we felt that this was O.K. as a one shot fix to bring minorities up to the level of everyone else. Trouble is, it never ends.
This is what I see in Obama. someone who was handed a degree from both Columbia, and then Harvard. Sure, he went through the motions, and can talk the talk. Performance??? Uhhh, better blame someone else.
Yeah sure Joe, "minorities enjoy grade inflation"? Give me a break! Did you guys use the affirmative action BS when Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice were around?
why don't you 2 biggots come right out and say it, to you blacks, are not as smart as whites, they are an inferior race to you
Ann Coulter already did - remember when she said; our blacks are so much better than their blacks?
The modern day GNOP doesn't even bother to put on their white sheets anymore...
we don't have to, just look at the statistics.
JamesInSeattle - fact is Obama is smarter than you'll ever be and so are many other minority individuals. And, you just HATE that don't you! Statistics say you're a loser and you have terrible inferiority issues so you strike out at anyone who isn't just like you!
Pathetic, really!
Obama/Biden 2012
Our professors used to post our test scores with our last name and student I.D. numbers. The number scores of the test and the letter grade next to it.
These were posted in the hall next to the classroom doors.
We began to notice mistakes in the scoring. Wait a minute. This guy got an 86% and he got an "A". This one got a 68% and got a "C".
So, a few of us went to the Professors office to ask what gives with these mistakes. He explained that this was Affirmative Action in grading. The theory being that this would give minorities a leg up in the world and would therefore make it more likely that their kids would then also go to college.
Fine. Except this isn't for just that generation. It never ended.
Why do you think Obama's grades and all his papers from school are "Sealed" Would he have graduated at all if he were graded normally??
Well feisty redhead with regard to your utter foolishness about Obamacare. It's best you and others take several classes on insurance 101. I sell insurance and have for 20 years. COSTS of premiums will never go down under the plan. And if you think that those already having an employer plan or paying for it privatley want the ill stricken to be under the same plan as healthy you have another guess coming. This isn't any different than WE taxpayers paying for title 19, medicaid, and free benefits to the poor. Why would I want to be insured with my vehicles with the same guy that has had 2 OWI"S, 3 reckless drivings, and 4 accidents without any difference in premium between the 2? This in the insurance WORLD is called adverse selection and is covered under insurance 101. What Obamacare is, is an entitlement program which is no different than his program now for illegals. I am sick and tired of supporting everybody else under these programs when I can barely support and feed my own family. It's bad enough when some women and yes there are those out there that are baby factories who get subsidized rent, electricity, food, and insurance already and in Iowa it's called the Hawkey program. Due to the Obamacare law my premiums via employer have risen 35% or $210 per month. Most if not all small business people WILL not hire due to the law. They can't afford to pay the mandated premium setup by Obama.
yeah why pay for some sick person with a pre existing condition, lets make mr insurance man here happy and lets just take them out back and shoot them like the nazis use to do, maybe gas them, that may be cheaper, well mr insurance guy enjoy every breath cause when its time for you go its gonna be very very hot and uncomfortable for you
How do you explain that prior to ACA passage, health insurance costs rose for most Americans at least 20% or more per year? It wasn't President Obama's fault now was it? You get points, though, for spouting the right-wing talking points perfectly. Too bad it isn't true.
P.S. You already support all those folks who do not have health insurance by paying higher costs for hospitals, doctors and premiums to make up for costs associated with those who cannot afford the premiums and for those who simply choose not to buy.
To Jody;
I have to agree that Health Insurance has been going up almost every year since I can remember. it would not be correct for me to say that so has everything else in the world.
I have stated this before and I will stated again my family insurance went up 40 dollars per paycheck for the same Coverage that I had last year. So this idea of making health care affordable for everyone is pure crap because it is folks like us that are paying more for those 26 year old that might stay at home or occupy wall street. I do not expect my son to be on my insurance until he is 26 years old.
So when you say that the right-wing is spouting their talking point perfectly, I would have to say the same about the left-wing doing the same thing. My proof is in my paycheck and please tell me why we need so many freaking pages on a health care bill. What is in it?????? As a woman I do not want to pay for somebodys contraceptive unless is for Health issues. I'm an Independent and I will vote that way for Romney in 2012.
Anyone who votes for Romney just doesn't understand what the majority of people already know... That Republicans haven't any good ideas or plans.
They've put this country in a rut, and are trying to destroy anyone who disagrees with them. They're limiting voters' rights, and stacking the deck against the Democratic Party and democracy in general.
I'm predicting Obama will win by a landslide come this November...
Still Hurting,
You are wasting your time trying to educate the die hard liberals that live on this sight. They wouldn't understand adverse selection from occupational risk. They believe they will get something for nothing therefore when you provide facts they speak of shooting sick people in the back yard or make statements like "We already pay for it because the hospitals and other providers already increased their prices to all so as to offset the uninsured. Yeah right, like they ever paid a hospital bill. They don't know those monies are indirectly paid by tax payers through hospital write offs. Darn it, I am starting to give facts again, sorry........