Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 1/31/2011 2:02:23 PM EDT
...as federal judge Robert Vinson rules Obamacare unconstitutional. At the same time, all republican senators are on board for a "YES" for repeal vote on the Senate floor.

A bad day for Obama... is a good day for America.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 2:19:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By sebois:
...as federal judge Robert Vinson rules Obamacare unconstitutional. At the same time, all republican senators are on board for a "YES" for repeal vote on the Senate floor.

A bad day for Obama... is a good day for America.

one small victory in a war.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 2:21:16 PM EDT
We shall see how it holds up in the Senate.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 2:26:40 PM EDT
I'd think some Dem senators would vote for the repeal, assuming they want to be reelected more than they want to suck dear leader's tool.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 2:28:13 PM EDT
Will that POS Reid even bring it to a vote ?
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 2:30:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FlyingIllini:
Will that POS Reid even bring it to a vote ?

Doesn't really matter if the unconstitutionality is upheld to the Supreme Court. If Reid won't bring it to a vote, it only hurts the democrat senators.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 2:33:40 PM EDT
A bad day for obunghole-care is a good day for America.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 2:49:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Partisan:
A bad day for obunghole-care is a good day for America.


Link Posted: 1/31/2011 3:01:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Keith_J:

Originally Posted By FlyingIllini:
Will that POS Reid even bring it to a vote ?

Doesn't really matter if the unconstitutionality is upheld to the Supreme Court. If Reid won't bring it to a vote, it only hurts the democrat senators.


Which is why the House republicans have brought the vote to the floor, and will continue to do so. It gets the democrats on record as being for or against Obamacare; this is a great tactic, given that Zerocare is the biggest "Who's-the-daddy?" piece of legislation in Washington. Only the most hard-core socialists want their names attached to it, and the moderate dems who went along for the ride are now scrambling to get out from under the wheels of the bus.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 3:07:14 PM EDT
FL FTMFW!
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 3:11:48 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Partisan:
A bad day for obunghole-care is a good day for America.


Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:12:13 PM EDT
This is big...great news.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:15:20 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:15:50 PM EDT
HAHHAHHAAHHAAHHAAAHA !
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:15:52 PM EDT
HAHHAHHAAHHAAHHAAAHA !
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:16:14 PM EDT
Awesome. Didn't just rule the one part unconstitutional, but since it's "inseparable", he ruled the entire law unconstitutional. Not just a slap on the pecker, but a full power shot to the balls!
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:16:42 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:17:10 PM EDT
They need to bypass all the appellate court BS and get this to the Supreme Court asap.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:19:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GB243:
HAHHAHHAAHHAAHHAAAHA !


You can say that again.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:20:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By oldschool63:


My banana won't be dancin' 'til that thing is dead and gone.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 7:32:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By resq2106:
Awesome. Didn't just rule the one part unconstitutional, but since it's "inseparable", he ruled the entire law unconstitutional. Not just a slap on the pecker, but a full power shot to the balls!


Link Posted: 1/31/2011 8:48:30 PM EDT
looking forward to the liberal comedians saying " the US is the only country that outlawed free healthcare !! how dumb is that?"
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 8:56:08 PM EDT
another victory for the consititution.... we've still got a way to go, keep fighting!
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 8:56:38 PM EDT
Winny, WIN, WIN
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 9:01:09 PM EDT
A great victory for common sense and the constitution.. This will all end up 5-4 in the Supreme Court...
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 9:02:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2011 9:13:09 PM EDT by warlord]
The reason why the GOP trying so hard to repeal his health care reform. They are trying to set up BHO to be one-term prez.


Originally Posted By 14TheKid:
They need to bypass all the appellate court BS and get this to the Supreme Court asap.
I am afraid that is NOT how the system works. I don't think you can do that.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 9:03:36 PM EDT
The lower court decisions mean next to nothing, I am not getting too excited.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 9:07:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By azeyecap:
The lower court decisions mean next to nothing, I am not getting too excited.

this is true but the shit talking from Obama to our 5 justices recently isn't going to get him any favors when they are deciding just how far they are willing to stretch the constitution to let his center piece exist.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 9:20:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By warlord:
The reason why the GOP trying so hard to repeal his health care reform. They are trying to set up BHO to be one-term prez.


Originally Posted By 14TheKid:
They need to bypass all the appellate court BS and get this to the Supreme Court asap.
I am afraid that is NOT how the system works. I don't think you can do that.

I am afraid it is, if it is deemed important enough. See below.
Link Posted: 1/31/2011 9:54:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/31/2011 9:54:41 PM EDT by orion251]
As written by the judge in his decision:

"I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’...” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 8:19:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By orion251:
As written by the judge in his decision:

"I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’...” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.
Ooooh that stings a little.

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 8:23:07 AM EDT
The judges decision might actually be a bad thing. If people aren't required to have health insurance, insurance providers will go bankrupt. You only buy insurance after you get hurt or get old.
So goverment insurance will replace private.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 8:23:13 AM EDT
It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood, a beautiful day for a neighbor...
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 8:25:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SS109:
The judges decision might actually be a bad thing. If people aren't required to have health insurance, insurance providers will go bankrupt. You only buy insurance after you get hurt or get old.
So goverment insurance will replace private.

The entire bill would have to be thrown out. You're right, requiring insurance companies to cover all pre existing conditions and not requiring coverage for everyone would be a death knell for insurance companies. Or we'll just be paying really, really high prices.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 8:25:42 AM EDT
Awwwwww man but I wanted my Obamamoney!
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 8:43:26 AM EDT
ost
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 8:44:57 AM EDT
Another federal judge ruled?
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 8:59:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By HiredHitman:
Originally Posted By resq2106:
Awesome. Didn't just rule the one part unconstitutional, but since it's "inseparable", he ruled the entire law unconstitutional. Not just a slap on the pecker, but a full power shot to the balls!




Are you a poet? I be liking that stuff right there.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 9:01:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 9:05:39 AM EDT
If and when it goes to the Supreme Court I'm sure Obama's appointments will have a lot to say about it.

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 9:17:56 AM EDT
"It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place. "

-Federal Judge Roger Vinson, in his ruling on ZeroCare
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 9:18:28 AM EDT
Originally Posted By GC456:


Link Posted: 2/1/2011 9:20:04 AM EDT
Anyone that voted for that cocksucker should be lined up against a wall and beaten with a bamboo rod repeatedly about the head and shoulders
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:35:22 AM EDT
Have the obama voters started burning down their own neighborhoods yet?

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:45:50 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SS109:
The judges decision might actually be a bad thing. If people aren't required to have health insurance, insurance providers will go bankrupt. You only buy insurance after you get hurt or get old.
So goverment insurance will replace private.







So how do you explain the existence of insurance before Obamacare?


Also: Pre-existing conditions are not covered or add additional premium to keep people from waiting until they are sick to buy insurance.

You seem to lack a fundamental understanding of how insurance works.




Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:47:14 AM EDT


Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:48:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SS109:
The judges decision might actually be a bad thing. If people aren't required to have health insurance, insurance providers will go bankrupt. You only buy insurance after you get hurt or get old.
So goverment insurance will replace private.


you got that backwards dude. Obamacare will make insurance bankrupt. All the mandates as well as forcing the coverage of pre existing conditions will drive prices through the roof. The fine for not buying insurance will be a fraction of what premiums will cost under fully implimented Obamacare. Thus nobody will buy nisurance until they are very ill then will dump coverage after treatment because the fine is cheaper.

The intent of this bill was to bankrupt private insurance by this means.



Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:52:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SS109:
The judges decision might actually be a bad thing. If people aren't required to have health insurance, insurance providers will go bankrupt. You only buy insurance after you get hurt or get old.
So goverment insurance will replace private.

The insurance companies won't allow that to happen. They'll paper DC with all sorts of money to get the entire bill repealed if the mandate is struck down.

Without the mandate, Obamacare is just massive and expensive new government regulations for insurers.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:53:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By sebois:
Originally Posted By Keith_J:

Originally Posted By FlyingIllini:
Will that POS Reid even bring it to a vote ?

Doesn't really matter if the unconstitutionality is upheld to the Supreme Court. If Reid won't bring it to a vote, it only hurts the democrat senators.


Which is why the House republicans have brought the vote to the floor, and will continue to do so. It gets the democrats on record as being for or against Obamacare; this is a great tactic, given that Zerocare is the biggest "Who's-the-daddy?" piece of legislation in Washington. Only the most hard-core socialists want their names attached to it, and the moderate dems who went along for the ride are now scrambling to get out from under the wheels of the bus.


Absolutely!
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:55:15 AM EDT
There should be a clause somewhere that punishes any publicly elected lawmaker that votes for legislation that is ultimately found unconstitutional through the judicial branch.

Start fining the fuckers 50,000 or 75,000 for bad votes, we might see some change in the socialists tune.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 11:00:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Vespid_Wasp:
Originally Posted By SS109:
The judges decision might actually be a bad thing. If people aren't required to have health insurance, insurance providers will go bankrupt. You only buy insurance after you get hurt or get old.
So goverment insurance will replace private.







So how do you explain the existence of insurance before Obamacare?


Also: Pre-existing conditions are not covered or add additional premium to keep people from waiting until they are sick to buy insurance.

You seem to lack a fundamental understanding of how insurance works.






Obamacare is changing current insurance laws, like there are no longer maximum payouts, children are covered until they are 26, and pre-existing conditions are not allowed to be used to deny coverage. So you could get diabetes and then sign up for health insurance. Hit 60, get cancer, sign up for health insurance.

Top Top