Yes, I can totally see why health care leads to no longer being a free country. But just out of curiosity, how many CONservatives had health care before this point?
Maybe if all the those objecting to “Obamacare”, which is ACA, as written in large part by REPUBLICANS, find themselves with leukemia or ALS, and have their children born with CF, or CP, and NO JOB because Bain closed down their employer, THEN ask them about providing basic medical care for all?
A statement directly from Justice Roberts’ opinion:.
Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices..0bama and the Democrats will have fun in this election season . . . .!!!
As a non-Marxist leftist, I share the concern of many on the right that the government can get too powerful. I grew up in the segregated South, and I saw a lot of bad government by the States. Then I cut my political teeth protesting against Lyndon Johnson’s war policy. I’m something of an anarchist, by my understanding the of the tradition, but I don’t limit my fears to the government — I would hate to be governed by the Catholic Church, for example, and I don’t much like the power that corporations have over our culture right now. But I’m also something of a pragmatist. I want to see what promotes freedom in real terms and what reduces it in real terms. For instance, I think compulsory public education promotes freedom in the long run. I would not want to turn the education system over the churches. I also think that a national health insurance system promotes freedom. I don’t see a slippery slope here — I just don’t believe that the US government is going to force people to buy broccoli.
And to answer your questions as to why it’s okay to have MA with public health care and not the federal government is twofold:First, it is one of the non-enumerated powers left to the people and the state. It’s in the Constitution that it allows states to try to do these things. If they succeed, other states will follow. If it fails, others will not follow. How many other states have public health care? None? Oh, that’s probably because the experiment failed. Proof that the system as designed worked. But applying it at the federal level does not allow citizens to vote with their feet (and thus their tax dollars). And it’s not within the Constitution to allow them to do it.Secondly, and more subtly important, it doesn’t impact the other states if the system fails. For instance, if some program in Virginia fails, those in Iowa don’t suffer for it. It’s geographically restricted. If Virginia turns into a cesspool of suckage, people will leave and go to states. You see this between California and Texas. Texas’ population is swelling with migrants from California. California is losing people in droves because it’s becoming such an oppressive environment. But California’s woes don’t hurt Oklahoma or North Dakota. But when you apply bad programs nationwide, the negative impacts hurt everyone. Prohibition is a perfect example of this. States have dry counties, which is their constitutional right. But when it became a national (and thus federal) issue, and changed nationwide, what happened? Figures like Al Capone rose to power and it criminalized otherwise acceptable behavior overnight. It was such a nasty backlash that they eventually repealed prohibition. That’s another case where the morals of a few were pushed on others, and it came back to bite them in the ass. See a similarity here? A majority of Americans do not want the PPACA. 54% want it repealed and start over from scratch. I’m willing to bet that 54% is the same 54% that is already paying the tab on all the other handouts to the rest of the country.
What’s your point? I’m not a Democrat, so you can’t insult me that way. I bet I know a lot more about the sins of both parties than you do. There was a time when voting Republican made sense, but no longer.
The quality and thoughtfulness of many of the posts herein attest to the wisdom of the Chief Justice’s ‘instruction’ I posted above..Lonecat: " . . . . compulsory public education promotes freedom . . ." and " . . . national health insurance system promotes freedom.".Patently false!!! In fact, those two elements have been uniformly used by the most oppressive regimes in history of mankind, precisely to control people..Freedom / liberty does not emanate from Government, which is exactly why our Constitution is designed firstly and fore-mostly to protect us from Government and why the Federal Government’s Powers are ENUMERATED therein..The way to exercise true freedom in education and healthcare, is to allow the PEOPLE to choose – vouchers come to mind. It is however, the distrust in the People that drives the Left to force their one-fit solutions on all.
“I would like to know what percentage of Taxpayers are Conservative?”….@eryx: “Not as many as you would like to believe.” Did you have a bad day? You have been doing a lot of ‘nay’ saying. It would be interesting to know what proportions of the people that pay the nation’s bill are registered R, D, I.
“So Party affiliation is not a good metric. Now, if you poll people on positions…” I see your point. But, the days of the Dixie-crats and Reagan-crats seem to be behind us. Polarization is big now. I asked the IRS about getting some stats and they said ‘we don’t do politics’.I like the idea of polling. We should exclude people that pay Zero Income Taxes. I estimate 17 million fat-cats will be bypassed. Not sure on the welfare end… maybe 50 million excluded there. My guess is 60% of middle class will be Conservative Republican Taxpayers.Now if we sliced the data for: who pays most of the Nation’s Taxes, then we have 6% paying 60% of the bill. That would be a short list to poll. There are a lot of millionaire democrat liberals paying taxes, so I am not sure what the percentages would be.For mud-sling, this chop-chop would be good stuff.
Wraithkin almost 12 years ago
Sadly, this seems to be increasingly the case.
charliekane almost 12 years ago
Ah’d keep an eye on that Romney feller. He done the same thing to them Massawhoshans.Puttem under the hammer ’n sickle he did!
Heavy B almost 12 years ago
Yes, I can totally see why health care leads to no longer being a free country. But just out of curiosity, how many CONservatives had health care before this point?
Dtroutma almost 12 years ago
Maybe if all the those objecting to “Obamacare”, which is ACA, as written in large part by REPUBLICANS, find themselves with leukemia or ALS, and have their children born with CF, or CP, and NO JOB because Bain closed down their employer, THEN ask them about providing basic medical care for all?
pirate227 almost 12 years ago
The sky is falling!Oh… wait… that’s not true.
petergrt almost 12 years ago
A statement directly from Justice Roberts’ opinion:.
Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices..0bama and the Democrats will have fun in this election season . . . .!!!
lonecat almost 12 years ago
As a non-Marxist leftist, I share the concern of many on the right that the government can get too powerful. I grew up in the segregated South, and I saw a lot of bad government by the States. Then I cut my political teeth protesting against Lyndon Johnson’s war policy. I’m something of an anarchist, by my understanding the of the tradition, but I don’t limit my fears to the government — I would hate to be governed by the Catholic Church, for example, and I don’t much like the power that corporations have over our culture right now. But I’m also something of a pragmatist. I want to see what promotes freedom in real terms and what reduces it in real terms. For instance, I think compulsory public education promotes freedom in the long run. I would not want to turn the education system over the churches. I also think that a national health insurance system promotes freedom. I don’t see a slippery slope here — I just don’t believe that the US government is going to force people to buy broccoli.
braindead Premium Member almost 12 years ago
Invasion of Iraq for false reasons is certainly NOT an example of govt intrusion.
But, improving health care for people IS.
Wraithkin almost 12 years ago
And to answer your questions as to why it’s okay to have MA with public health care and not the federal government is twofold:First, it is one of the non-enumerated powers left to the people and the state. It’s in the Constitution that it allows states to try to do these things. If they succeed, other states will follow. If it fails, others will not follow. How many other states have public health care? None? Oh, that’s probably because the experiment failed. Proof that the system as designed worked. But applying it at the federal level does not allow citizens to vote with their feet (and thus their tax dollars). And it’s not within the Constitution to allow them to do it.Secondly, and more subtly important, it doesn’t impact the other states if the system fails. For instance, if some program in Virginia fails, those in Iowa don’t suffer for it. It’s geographically restricted. If Virginia turns into a cesspool of suckage, people will leave and go to states. You see this between California and Texas. Texas’ population is swelling with migrants from California. California is losing people in droves because it’s becoming such an oppressive environment. But California’s woes don’t hurt Oklahoma or North Dakota. But when you apply bad programs nationwide, the negative impacts hurt everyone. Prohibition is a perfect example of this. States have dry counties, which is their constitutional right. But when it became a national (and thus federal) issue, and changed nationwide, what happened? Figures like Al Capone rose to power and it criminalized otherwise acceptable behavior overnight. It was such a nasty backlash that they eventually repealed prohibition. That’s another case where the morals of a few were pushed on others, and it came back to bite them in the ass. See a similarity here? A majority of Americans do not want the PPACA. 54% want it repealed and start over from scratch. I’m willing to bet that 54% is the same 54% that is already paying the tab on all the other handouts to the rest of the country.
Jason Allen almost 12 years ago
This is not a factual cartoon.
lonecat almost 12 years ago
Well, for example, none of the horrible things you predict have happened in the Canadian single-payer system.
lonecat almost 12 years ago
What’s your point? I’m not a Democrat, so you can’t insult me that way. I bet I know a lot more about the sins of both parties than you do. There was a time when voting Republican made sense, but no longer.
Kylop almost 12 years ago
It stopped being protection against government intrusion with the patriot act….if not before
Fuzzy Thinker Premium Member almost 12 years ago
“…conservatives don’t want to “participate” in anything progressive…” I would like to know what percentage of Taxpayers are Conservative?
Heavy B almost 12 years ago
The congragulations, NOTHING will change for you.
Heavy B almost 12 years ago
“Of course you won’t read about this, thanks to the efforts of countless liberal media robots”Then where, oh where did this info come from.
ninety_nine_percent almost 12 years ago
“Affordable healthcare” = “government intrusion” ?
runar almost 12 years ago
As the over 700 laws passed against reproductive health in the last fifteen years have already proved.
Tue Elung-Jensen almost 12 years ago
Since when was it? Besides its all relative matters – some call it intrusion others call it something else.
SpicyNacho Premium Member almost 12 years ago
We red states are going to be the one to bail out your corrupt, bankrupt state eventually.
petergrt almost 12 years ago
The quality and thoughtfulness of many of the posts herein attest to the wisdom of the Chief Justice’s ‘instruction’ I posted above..Lonecat: " . . . . compulsory public education promotes freedom . . ." and " . . . national health insurance system promotes freedom.".Patently false!!! In fact, those two elements have been uniformly used by the most oppressive regimes in history of mankind, precisely to control people..Freedom / liberty does not emanate from Government, which is exactly why our Constitution is designed firstly and fore-mostly to protect us from Government and why the Federal Government’s Powers are ENUMERATED therein..The way to exercise true freedom in education and healthcare, is to allow the PEOPLE to choose – vouchers come to mind. It is however, the distrust in the People that drives the Left to force their one-fit solutions on all.
fgriffintx almost 12 years ago
Relax, Right-O’s! Congress passed it, congress can repeal it. Anything else is just an attempt to end-run the voters. Good on Roberts!
Fuzzy Thinker Premium Member almost 12 years ago
“I would like to know what percentage of Taxpayers are Conservative?”….@eryx: “Not as many as you would like to believe.” Did you have a bad day? You have been doing a lot of ‘nay’ saying. It would be interesting to know what proportions of the people that pay the nation’s bill are registered R, D, I.
Fuzzy Thinker Premium Member almost 12 years ago
“So Party affiliation is not a good metric. Now, if you poll people on positions…” I see your point. But, the days of the Dixie-crats and Reagan-crats seem to be behind us. Polarization is big now. I asked the IRS about getting some stats and they said ‘we don’t do politics’.I like the idea of polling. We should exclude people that pay Zero Income Taxes. I estimate 17 million fat-cats will be bypassed. Not sure on the welfare end… maybe 50 million excluded there. My guess is 60% of middle class will be Conservative Republican Taxpayers.Now if we sliced the data for: who pays most of the Nation’s Taxes, then we have 6% paying 60% of the bill. That would be a short list to poll. There are a lot of millionaire democrat liberals paying taxes, so I am not sure what the percentages would be.For mud-sling, this chop-chop would be good stuff.