Beck Responds to Obamacare Hearings, VA Attorney Gen Weighs in
- Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:09am by
Tiffany Gabbay
- Print »
- Email »
As the constitutionality of Obama’s Affordable Care Act was examined for the third and final day in a row by the Supreme Court, a laser focus has been directed at its lynchpin “individual mandate,” requiring individuals to carry health insurance by 2014 or suffer a penalty (some consider the penalty a tax). This mandate has been the focus of the Court’s hearings. Another major consideration in the case is whether justices, if they do strike down the mandate, will in turn throw out the entire health care law.
Regardless of which side of the political fence one sits, one thing is clear: This is a historic case with monumental consequences if the mandate is allowed to stand and precedent is set.
On Wednesday, Glenn Beck dedicated significant time, both on radio and during his GBTV evening broadcast, to discussing this crucial matter facing the country.
Beck talked about how Obamacare has gone 12-rounds in the Supreme Court:
Meanwhile, I also caught up with Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, one of the original opponents of Obamacare leading the effort to overturn the mandate, for the latest on the hearings. Cuccinelli noted that the proceedings exceeded his expectations in terms of a possible outright repeal.
Based on the last three days of arguments, Beck concurred that “it’s not looking so good for Obamacare.” 26 states are challenging the law and say if the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate unconstitutional, so is the rest of the law.
Background:
The administration’s top lawyer, Donald Verilli faced a robust round of questioning, even by justices seen as sympathetic to the administration, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Yet even though those on the liberal side of the court appeared discerning to say the least, most believe the fate of the controversial mandate lies with Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and the potential swing vote of Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Verilli sounds nervous:
After Tuesday’s session, observers said a 5-4 decision along partisan lines striking down the mandate was likely. Critics have maintained the argument that if the government can require citizens to purchase medical insurance, it likewise can require Americans to purchase other “beneficial” items down the road — be it broccoli or a gym membership.
Justice Scalia dissects this point below: “Could you define the market that everyone has to buy food, therefore everyone has to buy broccoli?” The response to all of these questions seems to be – “Of course that very similar situation is ridiculous, but Obamacare slightly differs, so it’s okay.”
Justice Kennedy turned to that very point early into Tuesday’s session, asking Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. if the government could require citizens to purchase certain food.
“Here the government is saying the federal government has a duty to tell citizens it must act,” Kennedy said. He added that such a move changes the citizen-government relationship “in a fundamental way.”
“It feels good to have some adults in the room holding people accountable for their logic,” Glenn said.
While court reporting indicates most of the justices appear opposed to throwing out Obamacare in its entirety, their views on how much of the Affordable Care Act to retain remains unclear.
According to Cuccinelli, Chief Justice Roberts, for example, noted poignantly that states had been asking for money for years, and that this money had strings attached to it. He said the states gave up a portion of their “independent sovereignty” by accepting the money and the fact that those strings are now being pulled should not surprise them. Cuccinelli said it was a “finger wag” to states: If you are sovereign, then act like it.
As for Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor, who were said to have asked some pretty tough questions during the first two days of hearings, I asked Cuccinelli if they were exercising the same level of scrutiny today, or if they were showing signs they might acquiesce. He noted that there wasn’t a great deal of change since Monday and Tuesday but that if there were a vote in favor of the mandate, it would likely be from Sotomayor.
Meanwhile Adding levity to the day, Justice Scalia reportedly invoked the 8th amendment on “cruel and unusual punishment,” joking that it would pertain directly to reviewing the entire bill.
By and large Americans oppose the mandate based on constitutionality:
72 percent of Americans say the Obamacare individual mandate requiring citizens to purchase insurance is unconstitutional — and 54 percent of those who do want the mandate also cede it is unconstitutional.
“Seems pretty obvious to me,” Beck said.
During his evening program beck also interviewed John Goodman with the national Center for Policy Analysis to provide insight on the proceedings. Among the topics discussed were the potential repercussions for insurance companies who may have seen dollar signs if young, able-bodied people were required to purchase insurance:
Another topic discussed during Beck’s evening program was the single payer health care plan Obama said he wanted to see back in 2003. “If you pull away the mandate,” Beck said, the single payer plan is what the left will likely go after next.
Regarding the commerce clause, Beck asked if this was the beginning of its undoing.
“If overturned, you repeal the entire federal government” his guest said.
But do the numbers really matter?
“Because I’ll tell you how this will turn out. The main stream media is already saying this could be good for Obama!”
“Of course it is,” Beck quipped. “Because it is the evil right that has stopped the progress this country is making.”
And the seeds are currently being planted. Beck alerted viewers that the administration is already setting up the Supreme Court to be painted as “the bad guys.”
A former acting solicitor general for the Obama White House said:
“If the Supreme Court struck this down, I think that it wouldn’t just be about health care. It would be the Supreme Court saying: ‘Look, we’ve got the power to really take decisions, move them off of the table of the American people, even in a democracy…What I think is not appropriate is to take that policy debate and put it in front of the Supreme Court of the United States. If they don’t like the law, there‘s an easy vote and that’s in November.”
But this is how our government works, Beck said. The Supreme Court was founded in 1789 and it’s has been effective for the last 223 years.
Even a strike-down will be spun as a “positive” by Democrats:
And that very well could become the case, if we take longtime Democratic strategist James Carville at his word.
The general opinion has been roughly the same across the aisle, as both Democrats and Republicans’ believe the mandate will likely be stricken down. Yet before the hearings have even concluded, Carville may have given away his party’s hand in the wake of a potential Supreme Court defeat.
According to Carville, a strike-down is “the best” possible outcome for Democrats as the burden of health care would then fall to Republicans solely. He also inferred that the Democratic narrative moving forward will be that the Supreme Court overturned an election, bringing the country George W. Bush, and now the same court has stricken down health care.
Below are Carville’s remarks for clarity:
“They [SOTUS] overturned an election. And just as a professional Democrat, there’s nothing better for me than they overturn this thing 5-4. And then the Republican Party will own this health care system for the foreseeable future. … Go see Scalia when you want health care.”
Yet despite how the left may spin a potential strike-down, Beck said he found it ironic how the left champions the Supreme Court when talking about cases like Roe V. Wade.
“These nine people who sit on the highest court in the land will make the decision.”
“I love how they [left] love the Supreme Court on Roe V. Wade but when it doesn’t go their way they kick and scream and pack up their toys and they go home.”
Beck said that “whether you like it or not” these justices are a “living representation” of the statues outside the very building from which they deliberate, and administer justice.
They are the “guardians” and “authority” of the law.
Cuccinelli’s gut reaction to Carville was that he “loved” Carville’s phrase, “Professional Democrat,” and that he is “prepared for that policy contest.” He added that people tend to react “more out of consternation than out of contentment” and that this would likely be the case among Democrats if the mandate is struck down.
Is Phase II of Political System X apparent in these proceedings?
Beck said that the vast majority of the country thinks Obamacare is unconstitutional. But the progressives are “fanning the flames” to set the political world on fire, and according to Beck, this falls in line with Phase II of Political System X.
You may recall from previous posts on The Blaze, that one of the key components of Phase II is realizing a “fundamental transformation.”
Another key component of Phase II is “creating chaos” and causing people to rise up. Whether the mandate is struck down or upheld, “chaos” will certainly result from at least one side of the aisle.
If struck down, a “negative stereotype” (another component of Phase II) will be enforced stating that conservatives “don’t want the poor to have health insurance.” Conservatives will be painted the villains this scenario.
At the end of the day, Beck reminded that this mandate also reinforces “reckless habits” as it suggests Americans are incapable of taking good enough care of themselves. It also hints that citizens can’t financially sustain themselves so the government must do it for them.
Beck also posited that the president has “set the Supreme Court up from the beginning,“ since ”teachers unions have failed” people don’t know checks and balances.
“So who will protect the Supreme Court?”
Cuccinelli provides greater insight:
While Cuccinelli is not a direct participant in the litigation — given that the Court has deferred consideration of Virginia‘s challenge until after it hears Florida’s challenge on behalf of more than two dozen states — the state Attorney General has participated as an observer, providing daily commentary and analysis of the proceedings.
After Tuesday’s hearings, Cuccinelli noted the Justices grappled with the tax issue in particular. Ginsburg seemed to suggest she does not think of the penalty as a tax.
But the main focus still remains the mandate’s constitutionality. In a previous interview, Cuccinelli noted the Government has never before mandated its citizens purchase insurance, noting that 10 years before the revolutionary war, the British did not even compel Americans to “buy British products.”
Cuccinelli has noted that those arguing on the side of limited government have been “very consistent” throughout the case, yet the Fed has in fact shifted its argument considerably since the proceedings first started. “We quoted their briefs against them three different times so far,” he said in an interview.
Severability:
The issue of severability has become crucial among conservatives and the main question Americans want to know is if the justices will throw out the whole law, or just the mandate.
Cucinelli told me that after Wednesday’s proceedings, he saw “more openness to a complete repeal” and could, based on his observations, see a five-vote strike.
This case is unprecedented and the Supreme Court has made historical moves before. Coservatives are treading cautiously in the event this could be one of those times.
If passed, Cuccinelli noted in a previous interview that the move would “end federalism” as we know it. He added, however, that Justice Kennedy has been a “consistent protector of structural federalism” — which is to separate state from federal power.
After showing what the attorney general described as a “deep, philosophical understanding” of the issue at play – structural federalism — Kennedy challenged arguments on severability. The justice argued that if carved, there would be a myriad unintended consequences for insurance companies that were never even considered.
In a move Cuccinelli said was remarkable, Kennedy appeared to take a clear position by saying he “rejected” the severability premise. Cuccinelli added that he is not used to seeing Kennedy reveal his hand like this and that by saying he “rejected” the premiss, naturally leads one to believe he would throw out the entire law. “Reject” is a strong word, the attorney general said.
If the law is upheld, a clear path forward for conservative is unclear. The required 60 Senate votes needed to secure an appeal would be a difficult hurdle to overcome to say the least.
In terms of Republicans, Cuccinelli said he faulted the GOP for not doing enough on health care during their six years of control. He noted, however, that there are Republican lawmakers, including himself, who are poised to offer real solutions. Regarding the primaries, he said Romney can at least say, “look I cared enough about it [health care] to have done something,” even when Republicans in Washington did nothing.
Time will tell:
There will be much speculating as the justices deliberate but a betting person would wager the individual mandate will be striken down. The burning question remains: Will the baby be thrown out with the bathwater?
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 692 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 662 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 524 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 364 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 336 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 223 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 234 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order Read More- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 223 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (46)
ContinentalArmy
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 6:27pmObama care is UnConstitutional Period! Big Govt. Pushing Communism, Do it our way or be Fined! Big Govt. is Violating Every Constitutional Right on Record!! Supreme Court Justices Do Your Jobs By Protecting Americans Against Communism!! If Not I Will Not Comply With Obama Care!!
Report Post »jamestoms
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 5:33pmWell if it passes no more court, judges, lawyers police or any of that nonsense, your on your own.
Report Post »FedUpAlready
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 3:44pmWe wouldn’t need medicare or medicAid if we were able to pay what they do for services. Medicare gets a bill for $4,000 + dollars and they pay $508. While if your paying out of a health savings account you have to pay the whole thing. Same as private insurance they pay only a portion of the bill, while you’d be required to pay the whole thing.
Report Post »PeaceAndHarmony
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 3:07pmCan someone please explain to me why right-wing “Christians” who claim to follow Jesus are fighting tooth and nail to make sure people who don’t have a job with benefits are denied medical treatment?
Where in the Bible does Jesus teach that the poor and unfortunate should be neglected and abused?
Jesus actually taught just the opposite.
Can some of you right-wing “Christians” here please help me understand?
Thanks.
Report Post »black9897
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 4:41pmI‘m not against that I’m against a service or a product being provided at the barrel of a gun. No one should be forced to buy or do anything.
Report Post »DieBambi
Posted on March 30, 2012 at 12:49pmNo Christians are arguing that the poor should be neglected. Thanks for trying to blur the subject though. Let me offer some clarity. In America, no one is denied medical treatment as needed. Between Theft, and expensive health care, the Bible actually speaks against one. It speaks against theft. Jesus Christ did not say that there should be a government office to heal the sick, cure the lepers, and give sight to the blind. He did those things Himself. He then told us to do likewise and greater things. Not as a government, but a individuals and as a church. There are thousands of free medical clinics run by non profits.
Some will claim that when Jesus said to give unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar’s that he was saying Obey the Law of the Land, therefore taxes aren’t theft. However, Congress and The President are not the Law of Our Land. The Constitution is. Therefore when they force something upon us in clear violation of the Law of our Land, they they are not the ones following the edict of Christ, ergo, forcing me to pay for something in violation of the law is theft. Clearly spoken against in the Bible.
Report Post »patmcel
Posted on March 30, 2012 at 1:55pmSince when are the poor and less fortunate denied medical treatment? There are free clenics and emergency rooms that provide services that people do take advantage of but being free limits the quality of care. The costs of these services have to be offset somewhere else which means health care costs go up. Medicare and medicaid don’t reemberse doctors fully which means costs again have to be offset by othersand some doctors limit the number of recipiants they see due to this which in effect rations care. Forcing people to buy INSURANCE does nothing to reduce MEDICAL costs. Obamacare, in reality, would do nothing but increase medical costs (hurting the poor) and reduce the quality of service (hurting everyone). So to answer the question, the desire to not see people hurt IS the reason people are against Obamacare.
Report Post »AmazingGrace8
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 1:18pmThere is so much going on, I had a thought. One argument was (mandate funding fix) that x-amt of people are uninsured therefore, a crisis/economy crisis therefore, “a crisis war”. As extreme how over-the-top thoughts become, it could be twisted & turned to make it look “all Americans must sign up for this kind of DRAFT…signing each one of us to “fight” this “war-to-provide-right-to-health-insurance-for-every-American”. Manipulate common sense to pursue an agenda.
Report Post »AmazingGrace8
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 2:11pmI have a question…is there a law that bans supreme court judges from looking at this site & others since they are the highest court in the land…not during a court case…but just can they just “surf-the-net-opinion-sites-conservative or liberal? Sure, we know what their “leanings-are” but what is happening today will, of course, fundamentally transform this nation One promise President Obama is keeping to whomever voted for him. If this health care passes, like Glenn said yesterday on his radio program, where are people going to go to be free from tyranny? Switzerland could be a “moderate-country” to live in? Liberals think Conservatives are “coo-koo”(Swiss clocks/watches/) so makes sense to me. LOL
Report Post »discus02
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 1:14pmThe only positive I can see is Obama getting his ass kicked out of the White House!
Report Post »Teabunny
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 12:38pmhttp://lastrefugeofascoundrel.blogspot.com/2011/05/headrests.html I love my Ford! hands off my headrests Obama!
Report Post »Teabunny
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 12:36pmLove this government. here is another fun fact from the Administrator (oh, i mean administration) I love my Ford! hey Obama, hands off my headrests! http://lastrefugeofascoundrel.blogspot.com/2011/05/headrests.html
Report Post »Probably changing the built for comfort Caddy I love as well. sigh.
ProudCapitalist
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 10:49amThe important thing is to insure we have 3/4 of the State Legislatures are conservative in 2013 to call a Constitutional Convention “for the purpose of drafting a new Constitution”, approve the results, and limit the federal government to its very few, enumerated powers that do not include social engineering.
Report Post »AnAmericanToo
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 10:48amThe US Congress passed a bad law (legal usage). As US Congresswoman Pelosi declared “we will know what is in the law only after it is law’ (paraphrased). One US Congressman declared that he didn’t even bother to read the bill because it was too complex and too large for him to comprehend it even if it he had two lawyers (he himself is an attorney by education) and two days.
The law now is before the US Supreme Court. One of the Justices asked if the federal government attorneys would expect the Justices to read this massive law and decide which parts may or may not be constitutional. Another Justice commented that if the mandate is pulled from the law would that impact the ‘Congressional intent’ of the law.
Congressmen admitted that they had not READ the bill when it was before them so they don‘t know what they ’intended with the content’. Even the strongest advocate for the bill, Pelosi stated that they didn’t know what was in the bill at the time of the vote. The Court should rule that the mandate is unconstitutional and thus the entire law. It should put Congress on notice to read the laws before they vote. The bill was drafted by non-government interests.
Since Congress did not draft the law and was denied the opportunity to read it before voting upon its content, it is impossible to determine a Congressional intent in its common usage but only the intent of special interests.
Report Post »GrumpyOldFart1
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 10:11am“The supreme courts main function is to determine the constitutionality of any law passed by congress and the president. However, if congress did not create the law, did not read the law, but passed it with out full knowledge of contents, it can not be considered Constitutional.”
Report Post »AmazingGrace8
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 1:45pmRush made a comment today, it seems courts plea bargain now-a-days and trials for the truth, are not all that common. I paused after Rush’s comment and then a thought occurred to me, the mandate & the rest of the bill should go away. If the mandate is shut down, and the rest of the bill stands (plea bargain?) and goes back to Congress….what a mess that will be.
Report Post »Something has been bothing me and I don’t want to offend people that voted for President Obama because that was your choice…however. Glenn, Rush & others spoke about Obama & we listened. I do not want to “fade-out-all-of-the-people” but one person stands out to me & he just went on-&on-&on-&on about 2 subjects & many people rolled-their-eyes & thought (I did too after awhile) ENOUGH already (I would never vote Dem whoever is running) but Sean Hannity reminded us about the association of Ayers & Wright with Obama every show of Sean’s. Sean is a very genuine man..almost innocent in a sense..but just genuinely honest & sincere. Now…today..we are on life-support & ALL OF US are aware of what is happening because of Pres.Obama & his admin..Sure hope we can save this Republic for now & future generations.
God Bless America!
Stewman
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 9:24amMy fear is liberals learn how to do an end run around the constitution from this. One could tax everything and give tax rebates for what you want your subjects I mean citizens to buy. Taxes are already leivied on thinge the government wants to limint consumption of. I fear we are in a death spiral we no hope of coming out. The SS system is seen as constitutional (mandated retirement insurance) it is just a matter of time until health care is structured to fly through.
Report Post »Belzar
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 10:36amHUMMMM .. Let me see .. under the administration’s energy policy, if the mandate is upheld, the government could make us to buy “VOLTS”, in addition they would like us to believe it would cost less if they taxed the hell out of us to pay for emergency medical service or pay higher premiums for health insurance to cover those without insurance that go to the emergency rooms at the hospitals. Let me see, do I want to give more money to the government to regulate me or do I want to pay more in health insurance and keep my FREEDOM. I believe I enjoy my FREEDOM more than money and pay higher premiums for insurance until laws are passed so we can buy across state lines, etc ..
Report Post »ThoreauHD
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 9:02amLiberals spun the 2010 Tea Party slaughter is a good thing. But they are mentally ill. I don’t care what they think. What I know is that we need to prevent Obama from doing more harm to this Country. And this is the second step after the 2010 election cycle.
Report Post »mils
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 10:03amYesterday, James Carville gave his point of view and it was a positive for Obama adm if they “lost”..
Report Post »Moozmom
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:46amDon‘t much care what liberals do or don’t do because now, thanks to Beck and others, we know how to confront liberal/progressive ideology. I want the health care bill taken out and down completely; nothing else will suffice. I want Cass Sunstein and every other czar out of Washington and off our shores never to serve politically again. The liberals can all move to England and destroy themselves. I want sanity back in this country. I want every welfare recipient to work for their pay. I want freedom of religion restored. I want small government that meets 4 times a year and holds real jobs outside of their government service. I want the budgets shrunk. Politically correct, you say? Your being offended is your problem and not mine. Get to work, America and take down these communists among us.
Report Post »Sirfoldallot
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 9:00amThe rest of us were working while these commies took over America , maybe now we will pay attition 2 these no make sence idiots !
Report Post »encinom
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 10:36amMoozMom, if you want sanity back, Beck and the other Tea Baggers are the prime cause of the current levels of insanity. The HealthCare bill is a good thing the GOP has lied about to destroy.
Report Post »Annika2011
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 10:10pm@ENCINOM
Report Post »Why do you think anyone would listen to your point
Of view when you use an obscene term to refer to the
Tea Party? Especially when you are addressing a woman.
Gross!
SamIamTwo
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:44amHaven’t watched GBTV in a long time, but I did watch yesterday…and GB was GREAT! The Hammer!
Report Post »nilo
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:40amI do hope the Supreme Court does its job and be objective in the decision. If they are objective, they will determine the case based on our Constitution‘s protections of the individual against big government’s advances through regulation that puts the citizen into a situation that compels them to participate in a program that takes away their right of choice.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 12:37pmIf they do their job they would uphold the law. But given that Thomas has not stepped down, it looks like the Robert’s court will fall along political lines.
It is pure hypocrisy to have the AG of Virginia on. His State‘s GOP is look to force women to under go unwanted medical procedures and for the women to pay for them in an effort to shame them in foregoing the women’s protect rights. What is the violation of the Constituion?
Report Post »whereareyourbrains
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:31amSo what is 10 grand a year toward medical for 40 million people……………..or lets say 6 grand a year. We just gotta stop giving medical care to those 20 plus million illegals. Wow what a savings…………Take care of Americans first………………..
Report Post »FightingBear
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:30amThe lawyers defending Obamacare have reinforced what most of America has known for 40 years. Liberals are incompetent and worse yet, they don’t understand that they are. They believe that they are completely sane!
I found the three days of arguments incredibly entertaining. It’s been quite a long time since I laughed as hard as I did when the liberals were to trying to defend this debacle without a single good argument..
Report Post »LOJ
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:28amIts preposterous that this bill didn’t get read or explained to the people before it was passed. Totall non-transparency for a reason when you see the destruction thats in the bill, specifically panels that don’t know you, deciding treatment, or non-treatment.
Report Post »13th Generation American
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:28amThe individual mandate is a Republican idea wholly supported by the insurance companies and it will drive down rates for everyone, businesses support it also. People are taxed now for medicare to support people 65 and over. Imagine when the Republicans finally kill Medicare and millions of seniors will not have insurance. People are mandated to pay that tax.
This whole fiasco is going to backfire on the GOP and they will lose most elections in 2012. When preexisting conditions come back and children are forced back off their parents insurance look out.
People are mandated to pay that tax
Report Post »SoupSammich
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 9:04amQue? No hable, pendejo.
Report Post »Wilma
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:24amSupporters of healthcare are talking a lot about universal healthcare these days. If it ever becomes a reality, how long before the same people will complain the wealthy shouldn’t be included?
Report Post »They are doing it now with Social Security and Medicare.
Itsjusttim
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:24amYep, because it’s all about the progress of the country. Ah who cares? At this point someone is either of God or they are not of God, and the godly truly don’t care either way. Because those of the Lord can not sin, but we know sin, and we tell ourselves we sin so we do not deceive ourselves. And no matter how many gutters devilish people dig the godly can fall in them and it doesn’t matter, because the godly know right and wrong.
Report Post »Itsjusttim
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:27amSo if people think that causing the godly people to do wrong things will increase their sins to cushion your fall, you are wrong.
Report Post »Itsjusttim
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:30amEven a drunkard can get in Heaven.
Report Post »Itsjusttim
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:37amThe way I can tell the godly is by someone who will say if they had five minutes left to live: they would just sit there doing nothing. And the ungodly would say: I’d start making out with the best looking chick in the room.
Report Post »Itsjusttim
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:48amBecause a person can not steal the fruit away from the godly, and if you do while in life, then in the after-life God will take that fruit away from you plus the fruit you have earned, and give it to the one you stole from.
Report Post »drago
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 9:07amDude, you really need to buy your crack from another dealer,moron…..
Report Post »TomFerrari
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:21am@JudgeElenaKaga posited a half a loaf was better than no loaf.
Report Post »Whereas a WISE JUDGE once ruled to SPLIT THE BABY.
Only greedy, ill-motivated people will opt for half a baby.
NOTE to Justice Kagan, America doesn’t want 1/2 babies.
Time to ABORT OBAMACARE !
#AbortObamacare
eaglesview
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:20amOf course the Libs will try to spin it. Lies become truths in their minds, and truth becomes a lie. What are they going to blame on the Court, protecting the Constitution ?. Go ahead dummies. What are they going to blame on the GOP, protecting the Constitution ?. Go ahead. Yea we’ll have grandma being thrown off a cliff again, BUT 72% of us see this law for what it is. An outright power grab for bigger government, and redistribution of wealth.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 8:16amHow many stores will be looted the day Obamacare is struck down? Store owners better prepare like they are on the beach and a category 5 hurricane is headed their way!
Report Post »SoupSammich
Posted on March 29, 2012 at 9:05amWell said.
Report Post »