What is Digg?Sponsored by Threadless
The Threadless Holiday Sale view!
threadless.com - Today's the day to snag a deal on t-shirts! Threadless.com. $9. Every. Single. Tee.
156 Comments
- markgl, on 11/10/2009, -11/+79The auto insurance comparison is flawed. You buy auto insurance because you can inflict damage to someone else's property or bodily harm to another. That is not the case if you buy insurance for yourself because it only involves you and you decide what you want for you. Your forcing my to buy something and that is *****.
- nomarxist, on 11/10/2009, -12/+60I will ask again, just where in the Constitution does it give the federal government the authority to mandate health insurance?
- Grimee, on 11/10/2009, -10/+57So, if he doesn't like us subsidizing folks who don't want to buy health insurance, why is he apparently OK with us subsidizing welfare recipients who don't want to work? (Yes, I'm fully aware that there are some who can't work).
- sjl127, on 11/10/2009, -14/+54If I don't want to buy auto insurance, I don't drive, you stupid *****.
Are you saying that if I don't want to buy health insurance, I shouldn't live? FO already. - Chak2007, on 11/10/2009, -4/+37when does the government follow that old document? /s
But these are scary times indeed - Chak2007, on 11/10/2009, -10/+41The funny part about all this is, Congress and the president will all still have their own private health care. Some even said they do not want to go on their own public option, so why should we?
- Waiting2awake, on 11/10/2009, -5/+36They won't though.
Governments only concern is the acquisition of more power. Regardless if you were referring to Democrat or Republican - neither side support smaller government(Regardless what they say - look at what they do). So when one Party pushes through some peice of power-hungry law, while the opposition will complain about it, the opposition once they gain power never reverses it.
Remember how horrible, and anti-American the Democrats said the Patriot act was once the people figured it out? Remember what they just extended?
If only people would see it isn't Democrats Vs Republicans, it the Government Vs People. - Phaedryn, on 11/10/2009, -8/+39The mandated health insurance portion of this bill is actually a good thing....wait...
It is blatantly unconstitutional. There are two, separate, groups that are already drafting briefs to be filled immediately if this bill gets signed into law. It will be stopped cold by this provision.
The truly ironic parts is, they can't take this provision out either. It is the only safe guard against people holding off on getting insurance until they become ill and then, because the bill prohibits denial of coverage based on pre-existing conditions, buy coverage to get better. A situation which would QUICKLY bankrupt the entire system. And there is no way any bill is passing without the pre-existing conditions clause.
So...bill is DoA out of the gate.
I find that very amusing... - jammies, on 11/10/2009, -5/+34You forgot something here....THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION...........that's just an old rag to these traitorous bastards!!
- duggitt4u, on 11/10/2009, -4/+27I totally agree.
In addition, we can shop nationally for auto insurance companies and we have the ability to purchase from PRIVATE entities. Under their plan, we will be forced into a public option that will ultimately have no competition, can operate at a deficit, and the focus will become cost control. - Minarchian, on 11/10/2009, -4/+27"Some even said they do not want to go on their own public option, so why should we?"
Congress has exempted themselves. Therefore it is unconstitutional as it is against being treated equally under the law as the Constitution mandates, among many other unconstitutionalities in the bill. - cflyjuice, on 11/10/2009, -13/+35The GREATEST ORATOR of our time... when posed with a simple (but tough) question... attacks the question:
"The President said that he didn’t think the question over the appropriateness of possible jail time is the “biggest question” the House and Senate are facing right now".
Which means: "Let me consult with my Teleprompter and I'll get back to you". - stompk291, on 11/10/2009, -3/+25most of us don't like that one either. I'm all for individuals buying unemployment insurance, and voluntary donations to programs and churches, the YMCA, whatever., but I don't feel like I should have to fund that one either.
- drmangrum, on 11/10/2009, -14/+35At least when the political winds change and Republicans take back control they can repeal all this ***** if it gets passed.
- Minarchian, on 11/10/2009, -12/+33"“What I think is appropriate is that in the same way that everybody has to get auto insurance and if you don't, you're subject to some penalty, that in this situation, if you have the ability to buy insurance, it's affordable and you choose not to do so, forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you, you know, there's a thousand dollar hidden tax that families all across America are -- are burdened by because of the fact that people don't have health insurance, you know, there's nothing wrong with a penalty.”
By using this same argument, this Marxist tyrant will eventually create laws that tell us what to eat, how much exercise to have and what our body mass index should be. After all, all you fat people will burden the system for everyone else.
Add to that the citizenship tax, where you must pay into a health system to be considered a legal citizen and we, personally, then become property of the State in every sense of the word. - 7papa7, on 11/10/2009, -10/+29I can only hope that we have some lawyers preparing to take this to SCOTUS. It is blatently illegal to force people to purchase something they don't want. I don't think this bill as written has a chance before SCOTUS.
- jammies, on 11/10/2009, -10/+28Guess we'll ALL get to be put in jail, huh........only problem is, WHO'S going to guard all of us??!
- merton42, on 11/10/2009, -9/+27I guess they had better get to building more jails. AH HA, so that's what the stimulus money is to be used for. Why didn't I think of it sooner.
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 11/10/2009, -13/+3020 Years Ago: If communism was so great, why did they need a wall to keep people from escaping?
Today: If this new health care plan is go great, why are punishments necessary? - ghengiskhan1, on 11/10/2009, -10/+27The constitution is a document that outlines the limits of government power. LIMITS OF GOVERNMENT POWER. There is nothing in the constitution that gives the government the power and authority to force people to do something they do not want to do. This is clearly unconstitutional, but since our government no longer obeys the constitution, they do not care.
The right to own gun is a gaunteed right in the constitution, but for some reason the government isnt forcing people to buy guns. Gun ownership is EXPLICITLY gaurnteed and yet the government doesnt buy guns for people.
On the bright side, socialized medicine will limit health care to the elderly, the sick, the disabled and the premature (the groups that use the most health care resources) and once the feeble amoung us have died off, we will have a healthier nation because only the healthy and strong will survive without good medical care. - jammies, on 11/10/2009, -4/+21If these weasels had to have this same "plan", they'd REFUSE to be "covered" by it!!!
- duggitt4u, on 11/10/2009, -3/+19The problem is it will never get repealed once it's in.
- jdmgomoo, on 11/10/2009, -12/+28Here comes Big brother. And just think this monstrosity is only a bill now. Wait until the finished product.
The Government will soon be able to control the most private details of your life and health. - bluto36, on 11/10/2009, -3/+19"Pay up or else" has work for a long long long time
- merton42, on 11/10/2009, -6/+21In the words of Nancy Pelosickly, "Are you serious?" That pretty much sums it up, now get back to work and pay taxes!
- Waiting2awake, on 11/10/2009, -4/+18As someone once said, we the people, have out sheeped the sheep. At least the sheep require a sheep dog to keep then in order, we humans, "police" ourselves.
- merton42, on 11/10/2009, -4/+18FOOL, cause we are Serfs and they is Royalty. You not learn anything in school?
- markgl, on 11/10/2009, -2/+16Right, why can they let health insurance go across state lines? Increase the competition so the cost can go down.
- stevebee, on 11/10/2009, -2/+16I remember challenging my card carrying Communist mother with that. If it's so great, why the Berlin Wall? Why can't Soviets emigrate?
- BearKill, on 11/10/2009, -4/+18Thanks for stating what SHOULD be obvious but apparently isn't to most Americans. Most people buy the ***** car insurance comparison but it is not at all the same thing. This horrendous legislation will make it a crime to exist as an American without buying health insurance. There is no way that forcing somebody to pay a tax for being alive is constitutional! You can tax a man's property or make him get a permit to build a home or start a business, but you cannot tax him for breathing. That is nonsense, and partially explains why these unbelievable scumbags passed this thing in the middle of a night on a weekend. Nice try. Joe Lieberman and other sane people in the Senate will prevail!
- Waiting2awake, on 11/10/2009, -3/+16"By using this same argument, this Marxist tyrant will eventually create laws that tell us what to eat, how much exercise to have and what our body mass index should be. After all, all you fat people will burden the system for everyone else."
- Yepper, that is the slippery slope. Once you allow the first step, you have to allow the second step. - stompk291, on 11/10/2009, -2/+15except i don't have much more faith in SCOTUS anymore than I do in Congress.
- Waiting2awake, on 11/10/2009, -4/+17Of course not, don't be silly. They're politicians, the new nobility.
- stompk291, on 11/10/2009, -2/+14"some animals are more equal than others"
- stompk291, on 11/10/2009, -2/+13and illegals ?
- Chak2007, on 11/10/2009, -3/+14great analogy
- merton42, on 11/10/2009, -3/+14Now you're starting to see the light!
- pencilvanian, on 11/10/2009, -14/+24Obama reads off his teleprompters that penalties are appropriate for people who try to “free ride” the health care system? Do these penalties also apply to Allāhu Obama , Pelosi, Reid ,and their gang?
- Shwaavay, on 11/10/2009, -3/+13I wouldn't count on the Supreme Court to strike this down.
- BearKill, on 11/10/2009, -4/+14Yeah, what happened to the "shared sacrifice" theme Obama uses whenever he rips off people to pay for other people who get a "free ride" off the system?
- LeadOffMan, on 11/10/2009, -5/+15it doesn't
- duggitt4u, on 11/10/2009, -5/+15You are proving his point...if you don't use health insurance (like many of those that currently choose not to purchase it). But now, whether you use it or not, you are forced to pay.
- BearKill, on 11/10/2009, -4/+13You have fallen for the phony Obama talking points, as the ER argument is all but irrelevant. Using the cost of treating the uninsured in the ER as a rationale for forcing socialized medicine on us is like saying that we have an enormous budget deficit because Amtrak is not very efficient. Yeah, Amtrak costs the government money every year, but their hardly the root of our government spending problem. This also ignores the fact that most of the uninsured people in the ER are financial deadbeats of the highest order anyway, so the government will continue to pay for these in any case. If you have to threaten people with jail time to participate in something, chances are it's not that appealing in the first place, and it is certainly not in the case of Pelosi care. Forcing companies to compete with each other across state lines is the only way to address the cost issue, not some fantasy of a government gulag being more efficient than the private sector. Oh, and changing the anti-trust rules wouldn't cost taxpayers a dime either. What a shame, no redistribution of wealth. Oh, let's not even consider it then.
- oldhick, on 11/10/2009, -4/+13I don't agree, but if you want to know how the courts will find health care constitutional, simply look at how they found Social Security constitutional. Read up on Helvering v. Davis.
- Ouze, on 11/11/2009, -5/+13Journalism in 2009:
BIG HEADLINE: SOMETHING CRAZY THAT CAN'T BE TRUE?
actual small font story: of course it's not true retards, enjoy our banner ads - BearKill, on 11/10/2009, -4/+12Untrue. That assumes he wanted to use it, when he didn't want a damn thing to do with it. There are plenty of people out there who are willing to pay out of pocket for medical needs and only pay small premiums for high deductible catastrophic coverage and this is perfectly acceptable. Even if they had no coverage this can not be deemed criminal. What's next, eat a balanced diet or go to jail? Eat your vegetables or pay a fine? All the pukes who passed this are going to get a comeuppance in 2010.
- nomarxist, on 11/11/2009, -1/+9The solution is simple... Register Democrat, and do not pay your taxes!
- BillE3, on 11/10/2009, -9/+17And if I compare the fines against my annual cost of insurance and the fine is much less I will take the cheaper route. Then if I develop a costly need for medical care I can go for the cheapo subsidized governement insurance and get healed only to drop out again and start paying the fine. This is a guarantee for the government insurance program to suck the economy dry.
I think that is just what the plan is, to suck the economy dry so we will go into a national crisis. Then, just like in Russia, the wealthy elite can step in and buy up all the different resources at pennies on the dollar. Leaving the rest of us equally in poverty and ruin. Re-distributing the middle class wealth among the elite rulers.
Meanwhile the progressives chanting for fairness and re-distribution will be standing on the street corner hungry in rags asking what just happened? - Barackalypse, on 11/11/2009, -0/+7The whole notion that if you don't have insurance that you are somehow being subsidized by other people is flawed. It is entirely possible to either not use any health care at all or pay for any procedures you need out of pocket. Not having insurance doesn't make you a deadbeat, racking up bills you can't pay does.
- Batfishy, on 11/10/2009, -4/+10rugrat - Social Security is NOT voluntary. Try to tell your employer to stop withholding that. And good luck.
From your source - "You need a Social Security number to claim your child as a dependent on your income tax return." -
Show 51 - 100 of 156 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is