Stanek weekend question: What are some takeways from the Obamacare decision?
I’m distraught about the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Obamacare, but the fight to uphold the sanctity of human life must go on. The Bible is clear that God orchestrates the course of human events, including leaders of nations, good and bad. The Lord allowed this decision for His purpose, which is ultimately for our good, and we trust Him.
Curt Levey, President of the Committee for Justice and a constitutional law attorney, has written “Top ten takeaways from the Obamacare decision.” Here are the bullet points, although the full article at BigGovernment.com is well worth reading:
1. The charge that the Roberts Court is a right-of-center court has been proven wrong in dramatic fashion.
2. Five is not enough.
3. Though the immediate impact of the decision was a stunning defeat for conservatives, the larger cause of constitutional federalism was advanced.
4. Obama and company’s attempt to cow the Supreme Court succeeded.
5. The bullet ObamaCare dodged was more deadly than imagined.
6. Roberts’s opinion was judicial activism at its worst.
7. Chief Justice Roberts will likely be best remembered for disappointing conservatives in the most important case of his judicial career.
8. The White House should not be celebrating.
9. Don’t let the oral argument or talking heads fool you.
10. The meaning of the ObamaCare decision is yet to be determined
What are some of your takeaways from the decision?

I am saddened that politics is so rampant on this pro-life site. What about the poor sick families who cannot afford health care? This country is one of the only ones who has no national health care plan, but spends billions on wars to enrich the coffers of a few companies.
Please stop shilling for GOP politicians and support a truly pro family position.
C. Corman
What are you suggesting, Carla? That the national government is supposed to be a Robin Hood to take from the rich and give to the poor? (Actually to more useless bureaucracy, not the poor.) Are you saying that in civil government alone we trust? Not in our families or the church? Not in God?
It should be renamed the Obamatax or Robertstax. We’re about to get screwed again in 2014 – unless conservatives and Christians go in DROVES to vote out this BOzo on 11/6.
Having said that, I see this as a judgment from the LORD as we are ever closer to the end of this age. The LORD has the right to judge this nation for the sin of abortion alone.
LL
Too early to say that this is the most important case of Roberts’ career. He’s still young, and a personhood test case just might make it there while he’s on the Court. I do think he supports the right to life; the constitutionality of Obamacare had nothing to do with its abortion funding provisions.
I think the big takeaway for me is that Compassionate Conservatives are dead – that movement is over.
The law is far from perfect, but to hear people who claims to be Christians argue that having more people with access to health care is a bad thing because it might raise their taxes one day a little – that completely stumps me.
The other takeaway is the supreme court isn’t quite as broken as we sometimes think it is – at the end of the day, while I don’t quite agree with how Roberts got there, I believe they came to the right decision.
Ah, the whacked out liberals and their disproven theory that inventing a government program and recklessly funding it mean that you are a) more compassionate and b) compassion necessarily involves a government program.
Cause the government does things so darn well.
And the sex MUST CONTINUE.
The straw man arguement that some conservatives/Republicans/pro-lifers don’t give a dang about health care reform is getting old.
The fact is they do care to make changes and improvements. A good, easy place to start is for insurances to competed across state lines.
But the truth of the matter, as most will see when they take their rose colored glasses off, is that this is a bad bill in so many ways. It not that reform is bad, this particular bill is SO VERY bad.
Carla,
Please, I have been in the medical field longer than I want to admit to and I assure you people get the health care they need. Where do you see people dying on the streets because they can’t get care?
This “crisis” was generated to con people like you and some others on this board into thinking the gov’t will charge in like a white knight and save us all. When it comes to medical care, the gov’t has shown it is only capable of generating more red tape, expense, bureaucracy, corruption, horrendous waste, and frauds. Little else.
If that’s your idea of compassion, you can have it.
Two Big Takeaways for me.
One: Obama loves him some taxes. And taxes, and taxes, and taxes. Over one trillion during the next ten years, to be exact. Small potatoes.
Oh, and lie about it.
Two: Roberts has an enormous capacity for intellectual gymnastics.
On a side note…
One of my children’s physicians is a Cuban exile. He recounted how, as a child, the government truck would show up in his neighborhood in the morning, round up all the boys, transport them to do “voluntary” manual labor for the day, then deliver them back home so they could sleep and do it again the next day. Heaven help the family that dared protest.
He’s lived socialized medicine. He has repeatedly warned me and his staff that it would only be a matter of time that long lines would become the norm. A simple allergy shot that takes at most 30 minutes of wait time in his office will rapidly become a day-long affair, since the workload will enormously increase, the pay will not, and the paperwork/bureaucracy that the government will require will simply suck the motivation out of people. He’s frustrated as it is with his current Medicare and Medicaid caseloads.
He has warned of equipment and supply shortages, of the medical field having to resort to “old school” type treatments since there will always be budgetary limits and lack of innovation. The money won’t be permitted to go to cutting-edge research; it has to go the government instead.
He gets extremely passionate. You should see him when he goes off on Americans for being totally duped if they think free-medicine-for-all is the Glory, Glory, Hallelujah of their time. He simply can’t fathom how people naively believe they will get the treatment they need when they need it, without delay and without obstacles.
He mocks them, saying, “Just you wait.”
Can’t wait for the next appointment. I’m going to get a massive earful.
And Carla.
The poor sick families you lament do have options; it’s called Medicaid (which is going broke, too, btw).
You do realize that this law will now spend billions on wars healthcare to enrich the coffers of a few companies, namely health insurance and pharmaceutical companies, don’t you?
And that whole pro-family shtick…sorry to break it to you, but the provisions to mandate pay for contraception, abortifacients, and abortions are a far, far cry from being pro-family.
John -
Can you spell out how this across state selling would occur?
For instance, Blue Cross of Minnesota contracts with Minnesota facilities – if somebody from Idaho wants to buy in, would Minnesota contract with Idaho facilities, or would people have to travel?
What sort of minimum requirements would you recommend for coverage? Or would it be like credit card companies (and how they all have a home office in the Dakotas) so that they can provide minimum coverage. Would that work well in health care? If all the healthy people left plans for minimum coverage plans, and the cancer people can’t go to those plans (because of pre-existing conditions) – what happens to the rates of those left behind? They’d go through the roof!
What do you think about the Georgia law passed last year to allow for companies to cross sell into Georgia. NOBODY APPLIED TO EVEN DO IT:
“Nobody has even asked to be approved to sell across state lines,” Georgia Insurance Commissioner Ralph Hudgens said. “We’re dumbfounded. We are absolutely dumbfounded.”
I have been a nurse for over 35 years. Make no mistake, the people without insurance will always get more health care than the ones with insurance. We have co-pays, waiting times for appointments, etc. The uninsured just clog our ERs because they do not want to have to wait a few days to be seen. Not to mention our dear illegal immigrants who do not pay ANYTHING for healthcare. The Catholic Church needs to realize that their numerous lawsuits against Obamacare are fruitless. The Democrats would be delighted to have every Catholic hospital close because of abortion-think of all the money saved by closing all those hospitals. By the way, 50% of all hospitals will have to be closed to implement this disaster-the priests will just do the Democrats’ dirty work for them. They really need to wake up if they want religious freedom instead of “social justice”.
EGV,
The companies might start crossing state lines, heck they may fly to the moon, if competition gets stiffer. If more companies are coming in to compete with you, the more likely it is you will seek out new territory.
Also, Obamacare may be causing some of these companies to be extremely cautious about making major business decisions, such as crossing state lines. It is having an effect on the hiring practices of small businesses who are uncertain of what Obamacare will mean.
Isn’t government interference just wonderful?
Hi susan d,
Amen and amen. Maybe people on this blog who either do not comprehend or want to believe what I tell them will listen to you. I remember when families would bring in all their kids with head colds in the middle of the night. “Medicaid is paying for it”. I want to be admitted to the hospital “Medicare will pay for it”.
My favorite is the bumper sticker my daughter saw: ”Free universal health care for all” at the McDonald’s drive through.
Mary -
So where is a detailed plan – can anybody spell out the details? Anything run past the CBO or anything?
Or is the GOP approach going to be “trust us, we’ll repeal and then figure it out”.
The free enterprise plan is what I have heard from the GOP. Also tort reform.
Insurance reform. Allowing states more control with methods that best work for them.
Yes Mary – anything run past the CBO? Any other analysis? Is there actually a plan with hopes of insuring more people?
Or is the GOP approach going to be “trust us, we’ll repeal and then figure it out”.
If this election comes down to health care, I’m very excited. At some point, the GOP will have to say what they’d actually replace the plan with – and I think they have no clue as of right now. Pre-existing conditions will be back if the plan is repealed and nothing is replaced – and I don’t see how you get rid of pre-existing conditions without a mandate.
Will be interesting.
EGV,
What we have repeatedly discussed, and apparently has not registered with you, is what the GOP has offered. Tort reform isn’t going to cost, its going to save you money. So when some drunken idiot who injures himself on a child’s slip and slide, gets free care and rehab, he can’t then turn around and sue the hospitals that cared for him and win. That’s a true case BTW, the moron got millions. You helped pay.
Letting the insurance companies go at each other won’t cost, if anything it may bring your costs down.
Allowing you to pick and choose your coverage, set up your own health account, allow you to pass this account on to your survivors.
Generous tax write offs for medical costs, insurance, etc.
Insurance reform. Maybe with more competition the companies can’t pick and choose like they have been.
Won’t cost the government, i.e. taxpayer a dime.
Ex-GOP,
The short answer to your CBO question would be the Ryan-Rivlin Plan, which was crafted by a Republican congressman and a former CBO director. I saw this article posted on NPR.
There’s lots of details involved that I don’t have time right now to nitpick, but the overall sense is that it covers some of those major hurdles that Obamatax supporters oppose, while allowing consumers more flexibility with their own health insurance funds.
There are some aspects of it I personally would oppose, but if there was a compromise to be had, I would relunctantly settle on this one.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/why-ryan-rivlin-would-work-and-obamacare-won-t_547290.html
“He’s lived socialized medicine. He has repeatedly warned me and his staff that it would only be a matter of time that long lines would become the norm.”
You don’t think we can do better than Cuba, of all countries? Where is your sense of American exceptionalism?
“The money won’t be permitted to go to cutting-edge research; it has to go the government instead.”
What money, exactly? Be specific. You’re not making a convincing case for major pharmaceuticals and elite universities where most cutting-edge research happens suddenly going dry and being unable to carry on with their research.
Mary – yes – we talked tort reform. Estimates are that if applied at the federal level, we would save around .5% (or 1/2 of 1%).
And if you want competition, then you should support the insurance exchanges that some GOP governors are fighting about.
Carder -
The Ryan-Rivlin plan focuses ONLY on medicare/medicaid – it would do nothing to change the number of people insured, does nothing about pre-existing conditions, does nothing about caps (lifetime or otherwise), does nothing about competition – it simply a voucher program. Give money to people, have that money (yearly) raise at a slower price than health care costs, and you save money.
IF health care costs magically come under control, people can afford insurance in the private market. If they do not, seniors will bypass care and join the ranks of the uninsured.
It is not a comparable plan to what health care reform is – it only focuses on those couple of areas – not on overall health care.
EGV,
I’ll support competition whatever form it takes.
Tort reform at the federal level? I’m for putting an end to frivulous lawsuits of any and every kind for which you and I end up paying higher and higher premiums.
Let’s assume abortion is outlawed. Let’s assume the laws are EFFECTIVE. There is no great underground of abortionists. One and one-half million babies more are born in America each year, primarily to impoverished single women.
What will the results be?
Women who are pregnant that experience any kind of risk or complication will be told that because the special care their child will need is too expensive, they will only be offered an abortion.
Ill people and injured people will be told that since their care is so expensive, they can be offered end of life “assistance.”
I won’t have to tease Joan to pack for China because dang hau! it’s coming here.
Sarcasm and bluntness aside, I’m not taking this laying down. I’m going to fight like heck, because, as God is my witness, I’m not going to watch democracy crumble! Pro-life means not paying taxes to murder children and adults so that you can have a “free” flu shot.
I have taken away a few things besides soaked hankies:
1. Power corrupts. Hear that, Mr. Chief Justice? A little humility would suit you better.
2. This president is determined to destroy this nation and re create it in his image. More convinced of that than ever.
3. Even if the government CAN provide idyllic free health care for ALL, which of course it can’t’, and even if the government COULD do a better job than the private sector at providing health care, which of course it could not, It’s Not Their Job.
4. It’s so freeing to vote pro life! Maybe Carla Corman above is right? Maybe Justice Roberts has a method to his madness? Beyond me. You can’t kill the child in the womb. And the child in the womb has no greater enemy than This President.
Hi folks, (was more concerned with Carla’s quote)
I think it quite easy (even commonplace) in a ‘Christian environment’ like ours to seek for moral guidance by asking: ‘what would Jesus do?’ In asking Michelle seems wise. Methinks she only seems wise and never has really asked beyond wanting Our Lord’s approval of her nefarious ways. [She’s NOT alone – far from it!]
By asking in those words Michelle gives a non-Christian view of Jesus, that He is merely a godly historic figure who lived/died some 2000 years ago. A Christian knows He lives, so this question ‘what would Jesus do?’ is about NOW, and there is not the separation of time, as there is none for distance (like living in another country), nor age, nor sex, nor culture, nor race ….
Truly asking is a profoundly humbling experience and is fraught with uncertainty. To in the same breath say (in any sense) that God is OK with our massaquer of His children while they await birth, means she’s may be asking but she’s not-a listening to His response.
I am going to read the United States Contstitutio……..again.
Perhaps in my previouls readings I missed the part where it authorized congress to provide ‘healthcare’ for the citizens.
Carla or EX-RINO,
You seem to so sure that the federal government is responsible for every citizens healthcare.
There must be a constitutional basis for your apparent confidence.
Surely you can save me some reading time and just joint out the Article and Section.
Ken –
It isn’t in there, nor did I ever say it is in there.
What is in the constitution is the power for congress to pass laws, which they did. And the supreme court upheld that yes, they could pass this law.
Ex-RINO says: June 10, 2012 at 11:08 pm “For the record, I have three kids, my wife and I would never ever have considered an abortion, and I’m against it as I equate it to murder.”
Ex-RINO says: June 11, 2012 at 7:56 am “…at the end of the day, I’m more likely than not to vote Democrat…”
Ex-GOP says: June 30, 2012 at 1:49 pm …”yes – we talked tort reform.”
cc
r
EX-RINO,
Whew……I just caught my breath from rolling around on the floor laughing til my vision was so clouded from crying that I could not see to type. [It was theapeutic.]
Surely it has not escaped your legendary powers of observation that ‘trial lawyers’ are almost exclusively in the camp of the democRAT party.
democRATs are not going to bite the greasy palms that feed them.
Only a four star galactic idiot would believe otherwise. [Think cc]
Are ‘Carla Corman’ and ‘cash cow’ one and the same corkscrew?
Ex GOP, our constitution is set up as a limit to the whole government. The congress can’t pass a law stating that all Americans must be Presbyterian, because of our first amendment. Congress cannot arrogate to itself powers that are not spelled out–they are bound to provide a constitutional basis for the laws they pass. That’s why we HAVE a Supreme Court–in the event they go nuts and pass a law that is beyond their powers. They tried to argue that they have this power under the commerce clause–swearing up and down that it wasn’t a tax. The law was upheld on the basis of it’s being a tax. Justice Roberts was being an activist, twisting the law to preserve it.
Ken – and even if they did bite the hands of trial lawyers, there’s no strong research that shows tort reform would make a difference.
I do welcome the arguments though that the GOP will bring forth, and if they want to introduce more tort reform in the total scope of how we view health care, I think the debate should be welcomed.
I also hope that the American people welcome debate as well – when the GOP says we want to repeal the law, I hope people ask “and then what”? Do they simply want to go back to the way things were? is that acceptable? I’ve posted many times on this thread what the GOP plan is – what their goal is? I got one response, and it is simply a part of health care – does NOTHING to address pre-existing conditions, total numbers of those uninsured, lifetime caps.
It will be an interesting debate now that the plan has passed. The spin game has already begun – but when the hard questions get asked, I can’t wait to see how they are answered. Romney knows the right answers – he studied it – he passed similar legislation. Now he has to do the dance of trying to sound like a right-winger while knowing those answers won’t do much good. So does he pull more moderate and lose the right? Or does he simply play the spin game and violate his own common sense on the subject.
Jamie – thanks for the post – I don’t know what comment you might be referencing of mine, or why you put my name at the beginning of it.
If you need confirmation though, yes Roberts declared it constitutional.
Roberts was gutless. They say he wanted to make sure HIS court wouldn’t be known as an activist court, pilloried for a decision like Bush v. Gore. Well, that was a no-brainer to anyone with a modicum of fairness. You can’t let the Florida Supreme Court rewrite voter laws post-election just because they don’ like the results.
But now HE will be known as an activist Chief Justice, allowing the executive branch to levy taxes (fines, whatever you want to call them) when it is Congress who must do this, following the rules.
So the president who said he would not raise taxes on the middle class one dime is now exposed as the emperor with no clothes.
I hope that Roberts is that tailor who pretended to assemble an invisible cloak, but my gut tells me that he just passed the buck.
And we will be paying those bucks, and getting as little in return as we did for the two stimulus debacles.
Hans – what middle class tax hikes?
I’m middle class – get my insurance through work. What’s my tax hike? What percent or where? I’ll give you a few helping tools – I don’t tan indoors, I make less than $200K, I have a moderate plan (not a Cadillac plan), and I don’t have a HSA.
So where’s the tax hike?
http://www.smartmoney.com/taxes/income/what-obamacare-may-mean-for-taxes-1335896160486/
For starters. I heard there were more than 20 tax hikes, besides the fine for those who don’t want the plan.
And http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/29/Seven-new-taxes
And if you don’t like Breitbart, how about Forbes? Just google Obamacare taxes.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2012/06/28/obamacares-7-tax-hikes-on-under-250000-a-year-earners/
Hans – you said, and I quote – “So the president who said he would not raise taxes on the middle class one dime is now exposed as the emperor with no clothes.”
So let’s look at the tax hikes and what will hit the middle class, as you claim. Tell me if you disagree.
From Forbes:
– Individual mandate excise tax – won’t hit me or anybody that has insurance through work. Will only hit people if they refuse to get insurance – so will hit very few.
– Drugs trap – #2 – again, very small percentage – I threw myself out as somebody you could identify tax increases for – that one won’t hit me either.
– HSA cap – again – not me. Not many.
– Medical Itemized Deduction – have you met many people who have ever hit that? Much harder to hit as well when you have medical insurance as your out of pocket costs are lower
– HSA withdrawl penalty – again, going to affect many middle class people?
– Indoor tanning services tax – seriously??? do we even need to go there?
– Cadillac health insurance plan – $27.5K family plans get taxed…again, not something the middle class is going to get hit on.
So what ones do you think are going to hit a majority of middle class folks? Or you are okay saying this isn’t a tax on the middle class?
“Not many” does not equal “no one, not one dime” Bully for all those not affected. But specific taxes are a drop in the bucket compared to the knee-capping the economy will suffer.
This didn’t need to happen now. But I guess the Dems knew they would make us tread water for four years, instead of recover as well as we fell, like in all other recessions and recoveries.
Have fun welcoming aboard the newly-insured, as we sink.
I would have chosen JFK’s way, and made all the boats rise together first. Then we could help up the stragglers more equitably.
Hans -
I simply wouldn’t call it a middle class tax hike.
We were going to have a slow recovery simply based on the fact that government jobs at the state and local levels are being shed. In most recessions (maybe all) – we’ve spent to get our way out of them. Look at government jobs under Reagan for instance to get out of the recession.
Your little sentence in the middle ‘Have fun…” has a massively elitist tone to it – like we should simply throw the weak aside so the strong can survive. The problem is, we did sort of cover everyone, just in a very inefficient way. I would call this bill more of a shared sacrifice bill – the reason the GOPers came up with the mandate is because it is about personal responsibility and paying into a system that most end up using in their life. This is about making sure those folks pay in.
“Indoor tanning services tax-seriously??? do we even need to go there?”
Indoor tanning services are usually run by young businesswomen, not multimillionaires. Tax increases can hurt their business.
Medical Itemized Deduction- Yes EGV I have hit that. With my husband’s diabetes, lab tests, and supplies. We chose to pay less insurance and out of pocket for his supplies.
Maybe tax breaks would give more people incentive to pay out of pocket as well.
Mary – just to check, according to Forbes, 6% of all American’s itemize their medical deductions.
On indoor tanning – I’m sure the kids going to prom can pay a bit more for their fake tan. Hopefully we’ll bank the money so that when they get cancer later, we’ve got the funds available to provide them good coverage.
This tax /penalty / fine is just yet another sin tax. It won’t bother the rich. Just everyone else.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/wsj-economist-brunt-of-obamacare-costs-will-be-shouldered-by-those-making-under-120k/
The whole point of this sin tax is to corral us under Uncle Sam. Enough already.
And it’s not elitist to say we ought to patch up the lifeboat before we take on more.
(I do like my metaphors and analogies. Sorry. :) )
I need to decompress and watch a bad bigfoot movie on Syfy. Carry on.
X-GOP, what about my husband and I? We are poor. We can’t afford our own home (the area we live in the median home price is $350,000 much more than we could ever afford) We try to be as frugal as possible but things are very very tight. We barely have 2 nickels to rub together. We prioritize. For us having life insurance is more important than dinners out etc…
My husband’s job does not offer health insurance so we must buy our own policy. For basic coverage for a family of 4 we pay a lot. And with this new healthcare fiasco our premiums will rise. But screw us, amirite? We’re Christian so we oughta just shut up about it because after all, the “poor” (whoever that may be, certainly not us) will be helped.
Anyone poor enough is already eligible for medicaid. This bill is going to hurt those of us who aren’t “poor” enough but certainly not rich enough. My friends who can’t afford health insurance but don’t qualify for medicaid will now be hit with a tax (fine) that will be $695 bucks by 2014.
Btw, gotta love government run anything. This whole bill is about dismantling healthcare as we know it and leading us down the road to total government run insurance/medicine. Medicare basically told my 75 year old father that they won’t be covering any major procedures for him because of his age.
Do we need to “fix” healthcare? Yes. But this Obama fiasco is not the way to do it!
Sydney -
Is the health insurance exchange setup in your state? How do you know your premiums are going up? Or are you just speculating?
My guess is you will be much better off under the bill than you think – but I’d only be speculating as well – don’t know your income or any tax info.
“The candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon
vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of
the Supreme Court, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to
that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent
tribunal.”
Abraham Lincoln
We have a constitution that was written and ratified by men whose primary purpose was to limit the reach of the federal government.
Every federal elected official swears an oath, to the contitution:
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
The great weakness in the United States Constitution is that 5 Justices can make the constitution mean whatever ‘butters their biscuit’.
Former Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes once stated in a speech in 1907 that, “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is, and the judiciary is the safeguard of our liberty and of our property under the Constitution.”
When the ‘safeguards of our liberty and our property’ become the ‘foxes guarding the hen house’, then we soon discover what apparaently escaped Justice Hughes notice: The last and best safeguard of our liberty and our property is us.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.-
Suggest this 4th of July, before the sunsets and the fireworks begin you gather your family around you and read the Declaration of Independence and discuss amongst yourselves what those words meant to the men who signed it and what it actually cost them to do so.
Hold a ‘tea party’ before the festivities begin.
Senator Obama voted against the confirmation of Roberts in 2005, stating:
“The bottom line is this: I will be voting against John Roberts’ nomination,” the senator concluded. “I do so with considerable reticence. I hope that I am wrong. I hope that this reticence on my part proves unjustified and that Judge Roberts will show himself to not only be an outstanding legal thinker but also someone who upholds the Court’s historic role as a check on the majoritarian impulses of the executive branch and the legislative branch. I hope that he will recognize who the weak are and who the strong are in our society. I hope that his jurisprudence is one that stands up to the bullies of all ideological stripes.”
Note the last sentence. Roberts is now having to stand up to the bullies of the Republican Party.
At the hearings, some Republicans touted Roberts is one who exercises judicial restraint. So, with Obamacare he does, and gets hammered for it.
What is judicial activism? It’s when Republicans disagree with a SCOTUS decision.
1 – Dems said Obamacare was NOT a tax in order to get it passed. Dems argued that Obamacare WAS a tax in order to get it declared constitutional. Now Dems have gone back to saying Obamacare is NOT a tax. The takeaway Is that Dems are dishonest beyond all comprehension and should never be elected to any office.
2 – Dems say that anyone who opposes Obamacare for any reason opposes ANY kind of health care reform and wants millions of people to die. The takeaway is that Dems say that if you don’t approve of their methods, that means you hate the poor, hate minorities, hate gays, hate old people, and basically hate everything.
3 – Dem trolls gonna troll.
EX-RINO wants to convince you that nothing has changed, except for the better, and there is no ‘evil or sufferring’ in the future and certainly not now, from this overeach of liberal democRATS and their collaborteurs on the supreme court.
Do not fall prey to his equivocations, distortions, diversions, and perversions.
He is a minister of deceipt and he has first deceived himself.
Ex-RINO says: June 10, 2012 at 11:08 pm “For the record, I have three kids, my wife and I would never ever have considered an abortion, and I’m against it as I equate it to murder.”
Ex-RINO says: June 11, 2012 at 7:56 am “…at the end of the day, I’m more likely than not to vote Democrat…”
Prov 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie, but a false witness breathes out falsehoods. AMP
Prov 14:25 A truthful witness saves lives, but a deceitful witness speaks lies [and endangers lives]. AMP
John, many Tea Party Members are dishonest, too, stating there is one purpose of the Tea Party, when many of them made their priority personhood and ridiculous abortion restrictions.
And, don’t forget the lying Republicans (including Bachman and Palin) who generated fear with “death panels”.
‘How do you kill 11 million people?’
You lie to them early, and you lie to them often, telling them that you are doing everything for their benefit and you are protecting them from what they fear the most.
EGV 6:29PM
only 6%? Way too low.
Assuming of course the ones visiting the tanning salons get cancer. I suppose those going to bars should bank money for when they get cirrohsis.
The 10 point list is fairly comprehensive. I would add though that Robert’s essentially signaled that when congress passes a law he will try to see that it is upheld. This could be a great opportunity for us when we swear in a new congress dominated with prolifers. What Robert’s said about it not being SCOTUS job to protect the people from their political choices is true…we really needed a wake-up call…unfortunately it came in the form of him stabbing us in our backs. Shame on Robert’s for his judicial activism.
Now the job ahead of us could not be clearer. We must never again take for granted that any of our elected officials will act in our best interests. We must be vigilant and aggressive in monitoring and following up on the actions of our public “servants”. We must work hard to elect legislators who will pass solid prolife and sound economic legislation. They must present this legislation to Romney to sign and if he does not then we have to get someone in there that will. This is the way our framers designed it.
The other side figured that out to their advantage and we must wrest control away from them. From this point forward there is no excuse for us not knowing that the democrats are now full blown socialists.
And as for the main stream media…we know they are against us and they are pathetic. We need to use the new media to our advantage now more than ever.
Starting November 7 we have the opportunity for a reprieve from the disastrous Obamanomics and Obamacare. Our job is to be relentless in getting new people elected and pestering them to do their job.
Rollins, the Tea Party has no central leadership or official platform. No one person speaks for the Tea Party. It makes little sense to say that they are not all in total agreement with each other. What they have in common is opposition to tyranny.
As for the death panels, you mean the death panels liberal hero Paul Krugman says we need? The ones which would necessarily result from government rationed health “care”?
Of course you are free to speak out of your lower orifice and claim that the Tea Party lied about being the … Tea Party, or that Palin and Bachmann lied by telling us precisely what America’s leading liberal economist wants to do, but the idea that these are lies is debatable. And I mean legitimately debatable, with actual facts, unlike the dishonesty over Obamacare where Dems said it was NOT a tax it get the law passed, it WAS a tax to get it declared constitutional, and now it’s NOT a tax again because people don’t like that.
It is not the govt’s job to tell us what to buy. Period. Whether its good for us or not. Whether it will save money or not. Just like the excuses used to abort children, it does not make it right.
It is very possible that the old establishment Republicans influenced John Roberts, and caused him to change his stance, in order to galvanize Tea Party support behind Romney, as the only way to get rid of Obamacare.
This judicial precedent has inflicted widespread damage.
The response should be that the Tea Party remove as many establishment Republicans from office in the primary elections to come. We should keep cleaning house.
– Cadillac health insurance plan – $27.5K family plans get taxed…again, not something the middle class is going to get hit on.
Ex-RINO, If that is the case then why did the unions lobby behinds closed dorrs to get exemptions from Obama in order to avoid this tax then? Or do you consider the unions to to upper class?
John L -
1) I’ve never heard the argument that it is a tax made by anybody EXCEPT for speaking of it in a legal perspective on why it would be permissible. I personally think it looks and behaves just like a speeding ticket – if legally, that is declared or allowable as a tax, so be it.
2) I’ve never heard that argument. Never seen with millions. I think that people for the GOP are fine with the status quo, which allows people to get services when they are at an emergency faze. I do think this leads to people dying, and it is very inefficient, but I don’t think the motives of those against the law are bad (for the most part). I just think they are wrong and don’t have a good alternative.
3) Anytime people seem to disagree with you, you pull out the troll stuff. A little weird.
Rollins – good points. It would have been judicial activism to throw the law out. While some might disagree with the way in which Roberts supported it, it would have been a much bigger step to take something congress had passed and thrown it out.
truth – I should have said the majority of those on cadillac plans are upper class – unions do cover all spectrums. For instance, NBA players are part of a union.
Ex_RINO, over 50% of all Obamacare waivers granted were granted to union members. Over 500.000 union employes. And when Trumpka visited the white house to get his waivers he wasn’t there representing the NBA was he? Since you brought it up do you have any idea how many of those hundreds of thousands of exemptions were give to NBA stars?
Just as in Wisconsin where the majority had to save the willfully blind from themselves we will have to do the same across the country come Nov. 6.
There really is no need to keep explaining the insufficiencies of Obamacare. Most polls show that a solid majoirty reject it now that they have begun to see the problems with it. Some people will hang onto it to the point of irrationality.
In short, Herman Cain said it best–our job is to save the savable. No amount of explanation or pleading will do for those who do not want to see or who have agendas contrary to the purpose of this prolife website and blog.
Wf
I am saddened that so few see that “poor sick families” already have resources for them. Jerry said it very well. There are other ways to accomplish the good things that Obamacare purports to accomplish. To be pro-life is to unite with our communities and encourage them to vote their conscience in November. My area had a less than 5% voter turn-out for the Primary election. If America wants her country back, she needs to get everyone to vote. Here is a blog that lays plain what we can do, and expands the perhaps over-simplified list in this post: http://wewillnotbeignored.blogspot.com/2012/06/how-supreme-court-hosed-obama.html Hope you all will check it out.
truth -
They aren’t waivers of the law – they are allowing companies/unions to opt out of certain provisions during the phase in period.
Ashley -
I fully support a bill that allows individuals to opt out of Health Care reform – in exchange, for a period of a certain of years, companies can discriminate against those people in regards to pre-existing conditions. Those folks also get to keep lifetime benefit maxes – and those folks also can’t have kids on their insurance as late as they are able to under reform.
I also think, since mandates are so difficult for these people, that they should be able to have their name added to a database so that they are exempt from EMTALA.
Come on, power to the people!
Ex-RINO, I’d give it up in a second before I joined you in govenment dictating other peoples health care choices. I guess I value my liberty and you are looking for the government to nurse you even of ot means they can dictate what you do.
And you never responded to my post from today at 2:17…… I wonder why….hmmm
Truth -
How will this law dictate people’s health choices more than it has been dictated before?
How are you giving up your liberty?
I didn’t respond to your whole post earlier (I did a partial post on it at 5:48) because it was a dumb post. You can do your own research – the waiver information is out there – just like the individual mandate issue, which you botched. Just like the whole decision, which you incorrectly guessed on, scorned me when I pointed it out, and haven’t said anything about since I pointed it out.
How about this – once you admit you were wrong, I’ll answer more questions. Until then, I’ll just wait and keep reminding you.
How will this law dictate people’s health choices more than it has been dictated before?
Ex-RINO,
You need to try and read more carefully and take more time comprehending what you read cause you sound like you pay no attention at all. I already posted examples of this for you multiple time just in the past couple days:
Obamacare mandates will price a minimum health insurance policy out of most people’s reach. It makes it illegal for a person to purchase catastrophic health care policies.
I could list more but I need you to soak these into your brain one at a time so you can acknowledge that you understand them
“They aren’t waivers of the law – they are allowing companies/unions to opt out of certain provisions during the phase in period. “
Are you on drugs? If you are then stop taking them. If you aren’t then have a couple drinks cause whatever you are doing now is causing you to make less and less sense.
Ex-RINO, has anybody ever told you that you sound like Nancy Pelosi when you ‘reason’?
Randy,
I like the great majority of people in that “cult” a lot better than those in your primitive child-sacrificing anti-fertility cult.
Leonard, alternate personality of Randy,
Quakers aren’t forced to buy their employees guns.
I see we have some nominees for the dumbest trolls ever award.
I like how if abortion is illegal, oh noes, wimminz iz gunna die liek in 3rd world countries that’s got illegal aborshunz!!!!!!1 (rather than places like Ireland), but if we have socialized heath care, OF COURSE WE CAN DO BETTER THAN CUBA, LULZ!
I always love it when troll comments get deleted but the responses to them remain. Looks so funny.
Will prolifers still vote for Romney in light of the fact SEC documents show he led Bain’s investment in Stericyle, the firm that disposed of aborted fetuses? And then he lied about it? But the SEC documents don’t lie.
Either prolifers will either have to suck it up and vote for Romney because they don’t want Obama, which means they throw their principles under the bus, or they throw Romney under the bus.
either way, it’s not throwing our principles under the bus. The guy who had business dealings with a company that had business dealings with abortion clinics after the fact is the easy winner between he and a guy that voted for letting babies already born in live-birth abortions die on shelves in hospitals while he and his wife rallied behind partial birth abortion. Seriously.
My mom used to work as a receptionist/bookkeeper for an OB/GYN who did abortions (she quit because of her disagreement with abortion after a while). I’m not about to stop sitting at the table during holidays because of that fact.
Nice spin, xalisae. What you are saying is it is a choice between the lesser of two evils, then. It’s like saying, “I’m voting for the rapist who only raped two women because the other rapist raped eight women”.
Xalisae, spin it like a top. So, it’s like saying, “I’ll vote for a rapist since he only raped 2 women but the other candidate raped 8 women.” It’s the lesser of two evils, in other words. Well, you still get evil.
I know many out there will put their hatred for Obama over their principles.
No, Calvin, it’s like I’ll vote for the guy who used to be pro-choice but is now very close to pro-life. I can’t hold politicians to my 100%-without-exception view, because then there’d be very few people for whom to vote (if any). I think we elect human beings and we do the best we can. If you want perfect human beings, I wouldn’t look to Washington, or any other gathering of human beings. I haven’t found anyone perfect yet, and I don’t think I will any time soon.
Now, if a man committed a crime, paid his debt to society, and then ran for office, you’d have an apt comparison. But comparing Romney to a rapist over a business situation? Wow, I’ve got a rape-crazy friend that I didn’t think could be topped (she compares everything to rape!), but you just did.
I have a better comparison: Say I’m vegan and I want more vegan-centric legistation. Do I vote for the guy who’s a kind of lax vegetarian or do I vote for the guy who’s indebted to every big player in the meat industry and spends time that we pay him to lead instead making videos for the meat industry? That’s right, Calvin: I vote for the lax vegetarian.
If the only vote I’m able to cast is to limit evil, you bet I’ll vote to limit evil. I have a moral obligation to do so.
Sorry if I’m just a little better at living within reality than you are. If I could magically create some 3rd party candidate that would be my dream that wouldn’t totally split the vote on the right guaranteeing Obama’s re-election, I would, buddy. But that’s just not going to happen. Sorry there, sport, but this is just how it is.
X – I agree with you – I would love a ‘perfect’ candidate. Short of that, I vote for the person I think will be best overall, knowing that they have shortcomings.
A few folks have predicted that this will start a huge swoon for the GOP.
Early polls starting to come out:
– Gallup has favorability rating the same
– Gallup has Obama now at a +5, largest in a while (whole election cycle since they started tracking daily)
– Kaiser, which is more specific to the reform – deadlocked tie on favorable vs non-favorable. Win for the Dems is that independents want to move on (don’t want repeal). Win for the GOP is that their base is more energized.
– RCP has Obama up 3.5 – highest in a couple of months.
Again, the election is not held together – it is held in many months, so much can change. I think the GOP isn’t gaining traction with the “it’s a tax” argument – I think their best shot (other than the economy crashing) – is to come up with a better health care plan that is less intrusive, but keeps the popular measures in place.
Yep. Me too. But only if none of those “shortcomings” include advocating for the legality of allowing babies born alive to die, or delivering a child up to their shoulders and sucking their brains out.
But only if none of those “shortcomings” include advocating for the legality of allowing babies born alive to die, or delivering a child up to their shoulders and sucking their brains out.
^This!
Calvin, are you dizzy yet from spinning so much?
“I think the GOP isn’t gaining traction with the “it’s a tax” argument”
Ex-RINO, according to Pelosi it isn’t a tax at all. It is a penalty under the tax law. At the latest CBO crunching the Obamacare tax penalties will cost tax-payers about two trillion dollarsover the the six years from 2014 till 2020. And that estimate is LIKELY to keep doubling every year or so as the bureacracy starts getting put in place. No woories though. It is a pittence compared to the two trillion of deficit spending Obama engages in every year.
If Obamacare had kicked already the Obama could be deficit spending 3-4 trillion dollars every year and at the same time increasing everybodys taxes another trillion dollars a year. Your right though, the Democratic talking point are that we oughta just ignore all those taxes and deficit spending and move on. Keep it up. The tsunami is coming.
Ex-RINO, how many Democrats does it take to balance a budget?
Roberts screwed up, though he saved the commerce clause. In preventing a galvanized left (had things gone the other way), he delivered a force-multiplied vote against Obama in November.
A political decision on Roberts part. That’s unfortunate. But it will mean hundreds of thousands of [more] votes against Obama.
Ex-RINO, The middle class and the 18-30 crowd are waking up and seeing the Obamacare tax for what it is. Obama will drop big in these Demographic in 2012.
Maybe another stimulus on green energy is what we need? Or spend some military research dollars on a green weapons intitiative so they have green weapons to launch off our biofuel driven fleet of war ships.
I’m just glad Ex-RINO is going to pay my non-tax penalty under tax law for me, since I don’t have insurance and can’t afford it.
truth – quick reminder – you essentially called me a liar earlier in this thread – I then pointed out where it was you in fact, that was lying. You can apologize at any point – until then, I’m not answering your questions. It gets rude of you and you need to be able to, at some points, act like an adult in these conversations. This is one of those times.
xalisae – we don’t know the rates at this point, and I don’t know your income, but I’m happy that you’ll have a much greater chance of being insured than you were before. First of all, getting regular care will help you (and your family if you have one) live a healthier, longer life. Also, I’d rather, as a payer into the health care system – I’d rather pay for regular care and lower the chance of something catastrophic – which those who are insured pay for anyways (when the non-insured, such as yourself, have catastrophic needs). Just a much smarter system.
Huh? I should apologoze for lying? Cause I said I thought Obamacare was unconstitutional? You are losing it. Good time for a few days of dodging though huh?
I’d rather pay for regular care and lower the chance of something catastrophic – which those who are insured pay for anyways
Not true Ex-RINO. She could go to a Catholic hospital and get care without YOU having to pay for it. But if you have your way then you will force non-profit care out and make everybody dependent upon you and that is what would make YOU feel good isn’t it?
I already had a perfectly fine chance of getting insured, as I have been insured in the past, no problem. I take great care of myself and am very healthy, so regular care isn’t an issue (being insured for a period of 6 years, I can count the number of visits I needed to make on one hand), so I’d really only need a catastrophic policy. Which, thanks to ObamaTax, I can no longer get. But I still welcome your check in the mail to keep me out of pauper’s prison, since you were so keen on this bill. You sure are cute though, when you try to cover your butt.
xalisae – but you just said that you aren’t insured now – which is an issue. If you got into a bad car accident tonight, who is going to pay for you? You want my rates to raise to cover you because you weren’t covered? Is that what you are thinking?
truth -
I errored in that it was another thread (the thread of the Supreme Court decision on the way) – I said your predictive skills had been wrong – you then said:
“And you Ex-RINO have a very very flexible mind where memorys can be elasticized and fabricated. Either that or perhaps your mind is in a nearly perpetual state of memory elasticization.:
Thus, you called me a liar. I posted a couple of times you had indeed said it would go down. I wouldn’t have an issue with it, but you called me a liar on it.
No. I’m thinking that even if it takes a long time, I’ll pay off (or my family will pay off) my own effin’ bill like a big girl. Your rates are already going up, and have already gone up, BECAUSE OF THE OBAMACARE BILL, DUUUUUUUHHHHHH.
“I posted a couple of times you had indeed said it would go down. I wouldn’t have an issue with it, but you called me a liar on it.”
Ex-RINO, As far as I know you are referring to my statements on how bad Obamacare is and how many problems it would cause and how I agreed with a majority of Americans that the law needs to be overturned. Specifically you mentioned that I used the phrase “you can stick a fork in it”. That is all true. The mind bending comes in when you take that and say that I “guaranteed” you the law would be overturned and need to admit I was wrong before you will post anything else. lol.
BTW – I hear the IRS has thirteen thousand pages of tax regulation regarding Obamacare written already and they are just getting started. And people like you and Nancy Pelosi won;t even admit that Obamacare is a tax. The phrases “mind-bending” and “elasticity of thought” come to mind hen I hear things like that.
Lying again Truth – here was my direct comment before you posted that I was lying:
“You were very, very confident that Health Care Reform would be overturned, and it appears that you were very wrong in that prediction.”
You had previously said:
“Hal and Ex-RINO – you can stick a fork in it. Obamacare is dead. ”March 28th – on the same thread – from you: It looks like Obamacare is gonna get deep sixed by the supreme court. I am glad to see it go away even though I could have watched the Democrat party die a long painful death if it if it had survived.
So to say I fabricated things is lying. You can apologize, or I’ll continue to ignore your questions.
xalisae – If you are like the majority of Americans, you won’t. Facilities around my area (western Wisconsin) recoup only about 10% of bills for uninsured Americans. Plus, if you can’t afford health insurance, what leads me to believe that you’ll pay your bills?
The GOP is quite fine with a massive inefficient status quo – letting free loaders show up in hospital rooms with no compensation, and having those costs passed on to those with insurance. Predictably, those insurance rates rise, more people drop insurance, and the cycle continues.
FINALLY we have somebody standing up willing to take a CONSERVATIVE principle (the individual mandate) and telling people the free ride has got to stop or the health care system is going to twist itself into the ground.
“You were very, very confident that Health Care Reform would be overturned, and it appears that you were very wrong in that prediction.” That statement is the truth and I said as much in my response. As usual your comments make no sense. I just said that I was believed it should be overturned.
You seem to be stuck on some thread where I called your recollection of my comments :mind-bending”. Your mind-bending comes into play when you turn that into a call for me to apologize because I was wrong about the way the courts would decide things. I still say you can “stick a fork in Obamacare” and I still believe that it is such a bad law that people will get rid of it. If you tell me what thread you say I called you a liar on; I will go back and look it over again and see if an apology is due or not.
Truth – my 6:05 post tells you – the thread was the post when ruling came down – easy to find – the day the ruling came down, and you posted many times on it, so probably have it in your deleted files.
Ex-RINO, I will take the time to go back and look and read through the thread again but I need you to at least give me the name of thread you are referring to.
Supreme Court decision on Obamacare mandate
In general though I can explain to you the difference between the liberal mind-bending of the facts and lying. Nancy Pelosi’s position on wether or not Obamacare is a tax is a perfect example of liberal mind-bending. She insists that it is not a tax and states that it is a penalty under the tax code. I wouldn’t call her a liar for saying this but I would speak of her ability to reason with a certain elasticity that lead her to go through life speaking in ways that are false. Another example would be you earlier in this thread when you said “They aren’t waivers of the law – they are allowing companies/unions to opt out of certain provisions during the phase in period.” The facts is that HHS granted these unions “waivers” that allow them to opt out of certain provisions but you use liberal esaticity to argue that these are not waivers. Would you consider that I called you a liar on this thread for pointing that out to you?
truth – didn’t even rea your post.
This is about being a decent person.
I simply said your history of predictions wasn’t that great. You called me a liar when I said you had predicted that the courts would rule it unconstitutional. I pointed it out with quotes from the past from you.
Your call. We’ll always disagree on subjects. I’m fine with that. I’m not fine with dishonestly in the discussions. If there’s not even a bit of respect, let’s end any conversations on this board now.
Ex-RINO, you do engage in mind-bending. And you are avoiding my posts cause I make your liberal spin look foolish. Cry on someone elses shoulders if they’ll have you.
On June 30th Ex-RINO said:
” You were very, very confident that Health Care Reform would be overturned, and it appears that you were very wrong in that prediction.”
On June 30th truthseeker said:
“And you Ex-RINO have a very very flexible mind where memorys can be elasticized and fabricated. Either that or perhaps your mind is in a nearly perpetual state of memory elasticization.”
On June 30th Ex-RINO went all the way back to a discussion from March and said:
“March 24th – from you: “Hal and Ex-RINO – you can stick a fork in it. Obamacare is dead. ”
March 28th – on the same thread – from you: It looks like Obamacare is gonna get deep sixed by the supreme court. I am glad to see it go away even though I could have watched the Democrat party die a long painful death if it if it had survived.”
On June 30th truthseeker responds:
“Obamacare is an albatross around Obama and any other politician that runs on raising peoples taxes so that the government can expand Medicare and create health exchanges with tax penalties for NOT buying something. You can stick a fork in Obama now too.”
On June 30th Ex-RINO says:
” If you have any questions on the rest of your post after the word “freaking”, let me know. I was pretty dumbfounded that you didn’t understand the individual mandate still, and knew you were about to go on one of those senseless rants that I’m figuring out more and more, will say nothing.”
On June 30th truthseeker replies:
“Ex-RINO, I am posting it again for you here in case you missed it…..
This law will be a freaking never-ending monstrosity of litigation and bureaucracy until we vote the morons out who refuse to admit that the rest of us want to find a better fix to the “pre-existing condition” problem then government control of health care. And we want people getting access because the costs go down and not because the government pays part of everybody’s tab to the insurance industry. That kind of system would reduce the out of pocket for those on Obamacare but it would increase the total cost of the services and greatly reduce the number of people who can afford care on their own. Same with policies. All his mandates will price a minimum health insurance policy out of most peoples reach. It will be illegal for a person to purchase catastrophic health care policies. It will never end until we replace the president and purge the congress of DemocRats and RINOs. It is a tall order but if the wave of 2010 happens again in 2012 then it is possible.”
Then on this thread truthseeker calls RINO on mind-bending who got waivers and why and Ex-RINO realizes he is totally outgunned and has nowhere to run so he replies;
“ How about this – once you admit you were wrong, I’ll answer more questions. Until then, I’ll just wait and keep reminding you. ”
Ex-RINO, make up all the excuses you want to avoid my posts but don’t think that will keep me from calling you out on your mind-bending. You wanna cry about me calling you out on your BS by changing the subject and calling me dishonest. Really pathetic.
Truth -
Simple fact of the matter – with Mary, Jerry, Paladin – with the host of people on this site, while I disagree with them, I still respect them. I feel like we can argue with an honest sharing of ideas.
In this case, I feel that you’ve flat out lied to me. I’m not dodging your questions – I’m reading the beginning of your posts, and if it’s a humble apology, I’m moving on.
I’d do the same if I lied to you. It is about respect, and if there’s not even respect there, then it isn’t worth conversing.
Ex-RINO, Your ’feelings’ that I “flat out lied to you” even though I readily admitted that I thought Obamacare was going down to SCOTUS is just one more exercise of your disposition towards elasticity of thought and liberal mind-bending.
Truth -
My issue with you is not that your prediction was wrong.
It was that, when I said you were wrong, you called me a liar and said I was making up memories.
And then since then, you haven’t been man enough to admit it.
Show me the quote where I called you a “liar”. The ‘truth’ is that I never called you a liar did I?
June 30th – 12:29am -from me to you “Maybe, we’ll see – but who knows? You were very, very confident that Health Care Reform would be overturned, and it appears that you were very wrong in that prediction.”
Your response at 2:29am – “And you Ex-RINO have a very very flexible mind where memorys can be elasticized and fabricated. Either that or perhaps your mind is in a nearly perpetual state of memory elasticization.”
Then I posted two incidents where you had made the prediction, which I said you made – which at 2:29am, you said any such predictions were fabrications.
Ex-RINO,
Lets take a look at my post from March 28th that you are trying to use as “evidence”.
“It looks like Obamacare is gonna get deep sixed by the supreme court. I am glad to see it go away even though I could have watched the Democrat party die a long painful death if it if it had survived.”
Now notice how I qualified my prediction by saying that if they DON’T overturn the law that would mean an ongoing world of hurt for Obama and the DemocRATs. Your ”interpretation” of my statements is where your feelings and mind-bending come into play. I have already stoos by my predictions and have absolutely no problem admitting that I made them. What I do have a problem with is a liberal who thinks they deserve an apology from me because the Obamacare narrowly withstood the SCOTUS ruling and even then only because it was deemed to be a tax.
Fellas, let me have the last word here.
‘Nuff said.
10-4 Courtnay… there is always another thread :^)
.
Thanks Courtnay! Officially done with two things:
1) This thread
2) Replying to truthseeker (until an apology comes)
OK Ex-RINO, you are right. All those NBA stars that have been milking the system with their cadillac union health plans are just gonna have to pay up now. lol