• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Health-Care Reform Act Ruled Unconstitutional(edited)

Boo Radley said:
Again, if we use your reasoning, we have no place for the private sector.
Click to expand...

that might be the most ridiculous leap i've seen around here

and that's really saying something
 
yesterday, on the crucial issue of SPENDING, the party of pelosi SPLIT almost exactly 50-50 on the republicans' force-fed cr

Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer split on spending bill - Simmi Aujla - POLITICO.com

what do you think this congressional development portends moving forward for important elements of, oh, say, obamacare---such as THE MANDATE

the president's party is pulverizing, full public display

keep watching COMEDY CENTRAL, comrades

it's more cheerful
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Boo Radley said:
Simple. Nearly all are covered, meaning better access, which means better overall care, and we see they spend less. Less for more is better than paying more for less. Seems simple to me. :coffeepap
Click to expand...

Is that why england is having so much trouble paying for theirs?
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

ptif219 said:
Is that why england is having so much trouble paying for theirs?
Click to expand...

Like us, other factors have effected their budgets. Health care isn't a stand alone proposition. But the fact remains, they spend less than we do.
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Boo Radley said:
Simple. Nearly all are covered, meaning better access, which means better overall care, and we see they spend less. Less for more is better than paying more for less. Seems simple to me. :coffeepap
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_England
The median wait time for a consultant led first appointment in English hospitals is a little over 3 weeks. For those not admitted immediately, the median wait time for in-patient treatment in English hospitals is a little under 6 weeks Ibid. Trusts are working towards an 18 week guarantee that means that the hospital must complete all tests and start treatment within 18 weeks of the date of the referral from the GP
Click to expand...
Speedy ****ing Gonzales of the medical profession. :rolleyes:
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Boo Radley said:
Speedy isn't always best. Have you seen studies that show sometimes waiting is better than acting quickly? ;) However, there are places people wait a lot here. And, again, if you don't get care, waiting for some would be better than not getting any care.
Click to expand...
The longest wait I ever experience in 46 years was a 2 day wait to get an MRI. My sinus surgery last year was scheduled within 24 hours of a final diagnosis and discussion of treatment options with my ENT physician. I am unaware of any family member or friend that has to wait more than a few days for any kind of surgery or even a specialist consultation.

Since you mentioned 'studies that show sometimes waiting is better than acting quickly', perhaps you'd be kind enough to provide a link to said study, rather than make us look up something 'you' claimed?
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Boo Radley said:
Like us, other factors have effected their budgets. Health care isn't a stand alone proposition. But the fact remains, they spend less than we do.
Click to expand...

The fact is they can't afford the government run healthcare. That is what you can look forward to here if the Democrats get their way
 
Re: Obamacare Unconstitutional

Whovian said:
The longest wait I ever experience in 46 years was a 2 day wait to get an MRI. My sinus surgery last year was scheduled within 24 hours of a final diagnosis and discussion of treatment options with my ENT physician. I am unaware of any family member or friend that has to wait more than a few days for any kind of surgery or even a specialist consultation.

Since you mentioned 'studies that show sometimes waiting is better than acting quickly', perhaps you'd be kind enough to provide a link to said study, rather than make us look up something 'you' claimed?
Click to expand...

Boo also ignores the wait time in MA for a doctor appointment and because of that wait time the ER's are more crowded now than ever before. Imagine adding another 30 million to the healthcare system and what that will do to ER's and healthcare costs? Nothing is ever going to change Boo's mind but Boo never backs up his claims with actual data other than distorted cost figures. Somehow adding 30+ million to National healthcare is going to magically lower costs and increase access.
 
I'm guessing the poster of this thread doesn't put up threads titled "Obama Health-Care Act Ruled Constitutional" every time it's upheld in court.
 
Whovian said:
lower court rulings are immaterial.
Click to expand...

Unless it's not appealed (which it will be in this case).
The ones who held it up aren't really any higher in the court system than the ones who didn't.
 
Troubadour said:
I'm guessing the poster of this thread doesn't put up threads titled "Obama Health-Care Act Ruled Constitutional" every time it's upheld in court.
Click to expand...

Well, If Obama (and you) are so confident that the SCOTUS will uphold the law, then why the stalling game?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Well, If Obama (and you) are so confident that the SCOTUS will uphold the law, then why the stalling game?


j-mac
Click to expand...

What stalling game? Every case that comes to the SC has to go through a very specific process.
 
iamitter said:
What stalling game? Every case that comes to the SC has to go through a very specific process.
Click to expand...

Didn't the judge order the government to file their appeal, or comply with his decission? That was stalling.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Didn't the judge order the government to file their appeal, or comply with his decission? That was stalling.


j-mac
Click to expand...

It's going to get appealed by one party or another in every case that was brought to court.
 
iamitter said:
It's going to get appealed by one party or another in every case that was brought to court.
Click to expand...

Yes, but in this case it was the government that was ruled against, and just simply ignored the court, then had to be threatened by the judge. This is some group we have in charge.


j-mac
 
Whovian said:
lower court rulings are immaterial.
Click to expand...

Like criminal laws, court rulings are only immaterial when they are inconvenient to Republicans.

j-mac said:
Well, If Obama (and you) are so confident that the SCOTUS will uphold the law, then why the stalling game?
Click to expand...

"The stalling game" is the legal challenge itself. If conservatives were so confident the American people would be dissatisfied with the results, they wouldn't be trying to bring the program down before it even begins. At every turn, the GOP says one thing and does another. Its hypocrisy and doublethink are legendary.
 
Troubadour said:
"The stalling game" is the legal challenge itself.
Click to expand...


Wrong! The Judge in FL issued his ruling which was in effect a "cease and desist" order, and did Obama, and his AG comply? No. They stalled and ignored his ruling.

Pure contempt for the law.


j-mac
 
Troubadour said:
Like criminal laws, court rulings are only immaterial when they are inconvenient to Republicans.



"The stalling game" is the legal challenge itself. If conservatives were so confident the American people would be dissatisfied with the results, they wouldn't be trying to bring the program down before it even begins. At every turn, the GOP says one thing and does another. Its hypocrisy and doublethink are legendary.
Click to expand...

That is about the dumbest thing I ever heard. That is PRECISELY WHY the GOP is trying to bring that Obamanation of a health care law down... because they are confident the American people would be dissatisfied with the results.
 
j-mac said:
Yes, but in this case it was the government that was ruled against, and just simply ignored the court, then had to be threatened by the judge. This is some group we have in charge.


j-mac
Click to expand...

And in another case the govt. wasn't ruled against, but an appeal wasn't filed, either.

This is customary, cases usually take a few years to get to the SC.
 
j-mac said:
Well, If Obama (and you) are so confident that the SCOTUS will uphold the law, then why the stalling game?


j-mac
Click to expand...

I think you confuse things. Maybe you're just reading the wrong biased reporting?

“This is not the last word by any means,” a White House official told reporters in a background briefing. “We are quite confident it won’t stand.”

(snip)

Judge Vinson is the second federal judge to declare a key portion of the Obama health-care reform law unconstitutional. Two other federal judges have upheld the constitutionality of the law.

White House vows to implement health care reform, despite judge

The judge declined to immediately enjoin, or suspend, the law pending appeals, a process that could last two years. But he wrote that the federal government should adhere to his declaratory judgment as the functional equivalent of an injunction. That left confusion about how the ruling might be interpreted in the 26 states that are parties to the legal challenge.

(snip)

The Justice Department, which represents the Obama administration in the litigation, said it was exploring options to clarify the uncertainty, including requesting a stay of the decision, either from Judge Vinson or from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/us/01ruling.html

"Obviously this case will be appealed ... and so implementation would proceed apace ... This is not the last word by any means," the official said.

Judge strikes down healthcare reform law | Reuters
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom