examiner.com — The health-care reform proposals passed by the House and Senate and now awaiting reconciliation are unconstitutional for at least three separate reasons, a US Senator and two legal analysts said today. This as 13 AGs are already threatening to sue, and activists in every State are pushing for "nullification" of the very mandates most at issue.
Jan 2, 2010 View in Crawl 4
pyrrhuloxiaJan 2, 2010
Washington has a Democratic governor.
publiclurkerJan 2, 2010
Funny how simpletons like you think you can say what is and is not allowed when it's obvious that you haven't even read the darn thing.
droptop911Jan 3, 2010
"HINT: Auto insurance is mandated by STATE governments.)"Buit owning a car is not. so....
pyrrhuloxiaJan 3, 2010
"Rich" is always a relative term, and nearly all Americans are gifted with a relative wealth of opportunities, when compared to the rest of the world, though perhaps not with the ability to see them. Most Republicans appreciate these opportunities and do not demand that their success in pursuing them be assured. Most Republicans want to take their own responsibility for their health, perhaps contracting the assistance of competitive private entities, and don't want the government to take the responsibility over life and death decisions from them. They know that this has let governments "keep costs down" by allowing people to spend less on health care, punishing them with taxes if they try to buy "cadillac" plans, as if expensive health care was an offensively conspicuous type of consumpion, banning potentially-helpful procedures that not everyone can afford. Republicans know that fining people for buying more expensive things and subsidizing insurance for people who could easily afford it after modest sacrifices is intended to equalize the resources available to every citizen, regardless of merit. They know that this IS a tenet of socialism. They know that policies based on Socialist justifications fail, reducing the overall wealth of many productive people in the short term, reducing the overall wealth of all in the long term, unsustainably requiring more and more support from productive citizens that are made less and less able to produce.Most Republicans want the freedom to succeed or fail. Whether socialist policies are enacted by Bush or Obama, Republicans decry a world in which taxes are used to guarantee that they fail while others are locked into winning.Also, no one is so deluded that they believe they are entitled to bonuses and Gulfstreams. They act like they are because it strengthens their bargaining position, but only IF YOU BELIEVE THEM. So, if you think they are getting too good of a deal, don't hurt yourself by buying into the idea that they won't settle for less.
alamedamanJan 3, 2010
as if Obama or Nanny pelosi give a f**k about the Constitution.
alamedamanJan 3, 2010
doesn't Obama want to renew the patriot act? yeah I thought so.
wosatJan 3, 2010
Most states don't even require insurance for car owners. Many only require proof of "financial responsibility". There is a difference. Many states will allow you to provide a bond instead, or a certificate of deposit, or a certificate certifying that you are self-insuring. The last option is only available for rich people, but it allows them to basically state that they are rich enough to not have to buy insurance.The comparison to auto insurance fails on many levels.
1longtimeJan 5, 2010
It's not bad here, you should visit. We still have private ownership of assets, assault is illegal, and neither side of the aisle has convicted felons.Or stay on Hyperbole Planet or wherever you like.