Looks like this healthcare law may be toast

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mop up your spittle, crazy person.

Had Congress been forthright about what they intended and called it a tax (which it was) this never would have been a problem. Alas, they didn't. And why? Because they wanted to ram it through Congress without a broad consensus and had to LIE (vis-a-vis the tax) in order to accomplish their goals. It serves them right to get smacked in the face (or ass. or both = same thing).

Stop fucking with the Constitution and assuming you're smarter than the electorate. You are arrogant assholes - look in the mirror and face your weaknesses. Consider not running again for an office to which you are obviously so poorly suited.

P.S. It is hilariously and delightful how shocked and outraged you libs are at the fact that you can't mug the Constitution. SO much fun!!

You say it's a tax, and you say that a tax is not a Constitutional problem. If you listen, you will hear what SCOTUS is likely to say, namely that what counts is what it is, not what someone called it in the vain hope that some Republicans might overcome their fear of Grover Norquist and vote for health care reform. It is functionally a tax, and that should be what counts.

Stop calling people arrogant because they play word games; this one is nothing compared to the fetus/child game that tears the country apart.

[Anonymous]

Oh, you have it so backwards. This system does not thin out the uninsurable. Those people go onto Medicaid or Medicare. [/b]The younger ones are covered by employer plans (guess what, there is no such thing as "uninsurable" there).[b]

No, it's people in their 20's to 40's who think they can get by without it, who go untreated until they develop expensive health problems. Then, instead of getting thinned out, they get on the government health plans (either Medicare or Medicaid depending on when problems hit).

Lots of small businesses do not offer health insurance b/c it cost too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What almost all of the fools gloating over the probably/possible demise of the Aff. Healthcare Act do not understand is that there was unquestioned, indisputable, unanimous agreement among all the Justices and all counsel yesterday that Congress absolutely has the right to mandate health insurance as a condition of receiving health care.

The argument was all about the timing of when it can be required, with the so-called "conservatives" saying you can't force people to buy when they're young & healthy and don't need health care, but you can force them to buy it at the "point of sale" as a condition to receiving health care.

IOW, when you show up sick or grievously injured you can be forced to buy insurance before you're treated, only you'll be doing it from a high risk pool at wildly inflated prices compared to what you'd have paid if you bought it earlier along w/ everyone else mandated to have insurance before you need it.

So the smart alecks are completely missing the economic and systemic point and their gloating "big brother" attacks on Obama are utterly misplaced because there is no question (per the Court yesterday & counsel) that it is Constitutional to require anyone who wants health care to have health insurance.

I doubt that 1/2 of 1% of the haters have a clue about that (the level of ignorance in this country about the mandate and the health care system as a whole is just staggering to see).

Mop up your spittle, crazy person.

Had Congress been forthright about what they intended and called it a tax (which it was) this never would have been a problem. Alas, they didn't. And why? Because they wanted to ram it through Congress without a broad consensus and had to LIE (vis-a-vis the tax) in order to accomplish their goals. It serves them right to get smacked in the face (or ass. or both = same thing).

Stop fucking with the Constitution and assuming you're smarter than the electorate. You are arrogant assholes - look in the mirror and face your weaknesses. Consider not running again for an office to which you are obviously so poorly suited.

P.S. It is hilariously and delightful how shocked and outraged you libs are at the fact that you can't mug the Constitution. SO much fun!!

Conservatives had no trouble fucking with the constitution when it came to pot. Interstate commerce my ass Even Thomas said It was no more interstate than a bucket of chicken.

But feel free to be the party of constitutional convenience. Switch back and forth as often as it suits you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

No it's not. You are extremely repetitive and you deserve the "blah blah blah".

The fact is that most of government spending is for four functions (1) the elderly, (2) the poor, (3) security, and (4) public infrastructure. Unless you want to get rid of medicare, medicaid, social security, or defense, you can't really change "big" government into "small" government.

Medicare is reimbursement. Effectively all of the services are performed by the private sector. Social security is reimbursement. Defense is already outsourced to the extent that it can be. And the same goes for infrastructure.

You can quibble about the money spent on the rest of the agencies, but none of it adds up to "big" government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

No it's not. You are extremely repetitive and you deserve the "blah blah blah".

I'm repetitive? I've posted maybe three times in this entire political forum.... hardly a blabbermouth.

Might it be you who is repeating himself like an annoying two year old who keeps asking for more cookies?

Were you one of those snot-nosed little brats in preschool, who arrived in dirty clothes and then whined all day?

When you grabbed the other kid's toys, did your mother, instead of correcting you, tell the other kid to SHARE?

Are you now one those arrogant pricks who thinks another man's wealth is yours?

Yeah, I think I've got your number......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What almost all of the fools gloating over the probably/possible demise of the Aff. Healthcare Act do not understand is that there was unquestioned, indisputable, unanimous agreement among all the Justices and all counsel yesterday that Congress absolutely has the right to mandate health insurance as a condition of receiving health care.

The argument was all about the timing of when it can be required, with the so-called "conservatives" saying you can't force people to buy when they're young & healthy and don't need health care, but you can force them to buy it at the "point of sale" as a condition to receiving health care.

IOW, when you show up sick or grievously injured you can be forced to buy insurance before you're treated, only you'll be doing it from a high risk pool at wildly inflated prices compared to what you'd have paid if you bought it earlier along w/ everyone else mandated to have insurance before you need it.

So the smart alecks are completely missing the economic and systemic point and their gloating "big brother" attacks on Obama are utterly misplaced because there is no question (per the Court yesterday & counsel) that it is Constitutional to require anyone who wants health care to have health insurance.

I doubt that 1/2 of 1% of the haters have a clue about that (the level of ignorance in this country about the mandate and the health care system as a whole is just staggering to see).

Mop up your spittle, crazy person.

Had Congress been forthright about what they intended and called it a tax (which it was) this never would have been a problem. Alas, they didn't. And why? Because they wanted to ram it through Congress without a broad consensus and had to LIE (vis-a-vis the tax) in order to accomplish their goals. It serves them right to get smacked in the face (or ass. or both = same thing).

Stop fucking with the Constitution and assuming you're smarter than the electorate. You are arrogant assholes - look in the mirror and face your weaknesses. Consider not running again for an office to which you are obviously so poorly suited.

P.S. It is hilariously and delightful how shocked and outraged you libs are at the fact that you can't mug the Constitution. SO much fun!!

That's me you're quoting...

First of all, what makes you think I am a liberal? I think you would be quite surprised by my views but then again, you know what happens when you assume, right? You make an ass out of U + me.

Now ... enlighten us, o wise one... what are your experience and credentials in Constitutional interpretation? How many appellate cases have your argued based on Federal constitutional grounds, or what courses in it have you taken?

It sounds like your just a Faux News poseur with barely any intellectual heft to your point, just some f-words and diatribes.... about what I might expect.

[Anonymous]

PP here, some of those "your" should be "you're" of course...

and to the genius who quoted me with such disdain ... what will you say about supposed liberal twisting of the Consitution if the day comes when Congress passes a mandatory single payer universal coverage (socialized medicine!), which every single member of the Court said was absolutely acceptable and has no Constitutional infirmities?

You'll be just fine with that, right? .... Right? ....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

No it's not. You are extremely repetitive and you deserve the "blah blah blah".

I'm repetitive? I've posted maybe three times in this entire political forum.... hardly a blabbermouth.

Might it be you who is repeating himself like an annoying two year old who keeps asking for more cookies?

Were you one of those snot-nosed little brats in preschool, who arrived in dirty clothes and then whined all day?

When you grabbed the other kid's toys, did your mother, instead of correcting you, tell the other kid to SHARE?

Are you now one those arrogant pricks who thinks another man's wealth is yours?

Yeah, I think I've got your number......

I gave you some content and you passed it by. I think we have YOUR number.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

No it's not. You are extremely repetitive and you deserve the "blah blah blah".

I'm repetitive? I've posted maybe three times in this entire political forum.... hardly a blabbermouth.

Might it be you who is repeating himself like an annoying two year old who keeps asking for more cookies?

Were you one of those snot-nosed little brats in preschool, who arrived in dirty clothes and then whined all day?

When you grabbed the other kid's toys, did your mother, instead of correcting you, tell the other kid to SHARE?

Are you now one those arrogant pricks who thinks another man's wealth is yours?

Yeah, I think I've got your number......

I gave you some content and you passed it by. I think we have YOUR number.

WE? What, you got a crowd inside your head? Or are you just one of those limp-dick liberals who has to hide his pansy-ass in group think bullshit?

Speak for yourself.... go ahead, you can do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I gave you some content and you passed it by. I think we have YOUR number.

WE? What, you got a crowd inside your head? Or are you just one of those limp-dick liberals who has to hide his pansy-ass in group think bullshit?

Speak for yourself.... go ahead, you can do it.







Man, you really are utterly incapable of presenting a coherent well thought argument rather than just short nasty 10th grade attacks, aren't you?

Reflects very well on you and your point of view. Good job ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

No it's not. You are extremely repetitive and you deserve the "blah blah blah".

I'm repetitive? I've posted maybe three times in this entire political forum.... hardly a blabbermouth.

Might it be you who is repeating himself like an annoying two year old who keeps asking for more cookies?

Were you one of those snot-nosed little brats in preschool, who arrived in dirty clothes and then whined all day?

When you grabbed the other kid's toys, did your mother, instead of correcting you, tell the other kid to SHARE?

Are you now one those arrogant pricks who thinks another man's wealth is yours?

Yeah, I think I've got your number......

I gave you some content and you passed it by. I think we have YOUR number.

WE? What, you got a crowd inside your head? Or are you just one of those limp-dick liberals who has to hide his pansy-ass in group think bullshit?

Speak for yourself.... go ahead, you can do it.

Uh, you are ranting at multiple posters. That should be obvious.

If you would like to talk about the size of government, please do so. If you want to get red faced and stomp around some more, feel free to do that, too. I had a feeling you were about an inch deep on this topic, and this pretty much proves it.

[Anonymous]

Since we're an anonymous list, for the most part, it makes little sense to criticize the posters as opposed to the content. It's especially unfortunate here, when there are actual substantive issues.

My favorite question in this thread is still whether the mandate will be declared unconstitutional based on the purely notational issue of whether something is called a tax or a penalty and/or the chronological issue of when it occurs. My guess is that Kennedy and Roberts will be embarrassed to do so and that Roberts will write a reluctant opinion for the 6 - 3 majority, affirming that the will of Congress must be respected, even when it is imperfect.

The broccolli/what brand of car we have to buy/slippery slope argument seems to me to be the silliest aspect of this. All sorts of behavior become illegal when carried to extremes. Can you imagine arresting someone for taking his hat off on grounds that sooner or later that kind of behavior leads to indecent exposure?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I gave you some content and you passed it by. I think we have YOUR number.

WE? What, you got a crowd inside your head? Or are you just one of those limp-dick liberals who has to hide his pansy-ass in group think bullshit?

Speak for yourself.... go ahead, you can do it.

Man, you really are utterly incapable of presenting a coherent well thought argument rather than just short nasty 10th grade attacks, aren't you?



Blah, blah, blah. Go protest in front of one of Al Gore's mansions. Maybe he'll throw you a buck if you don't defecate on his new car.

[Anonymous]

Btw the above is yet another poster.