If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(US Supreme Court) NewsFlash Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional. The bland mask that is Mitt Romney's face twitches with something called "emotion"   (supremecourt.gov) divider line 3382
    More: NewsFlash, obamacare, supreme courts, Mitt Romney, supreme court ruling  
•       •       •

14920 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Jun 2012 at 10:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

3382 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | » | Last
 
2012-06-28 01:00:36 PM  

Rwa2play: xanadian: *saunters into thread*

[narwhaler.com image 469x453]

Problem, GOP?

I can only begin to imagine the conservative butthurt today...

Believe me, it's bigger than you can imagine

/moar trollface


I haven't seen Butthurt so big since John Holmes plugged Bruce Villanch.
 
2012-06-28 01:00:42 PM  
What about that free market that conservatives have got such a huge hardon for? Premiums won't go up because they can't, according to free market principles. Everybody has to participate, so there's guaranteed business for the company with the lowest prices.

What is that, you say? Companies will collude and engage in price-fixing? Sounds like you need some REGULATION to prevent that! But hold fast! A true free market conservative would never support MORE regulation.

How did we trick the GOP into supporting more regulation?
 
2012-06-28 01:00:49 PM  

HeartBurnKid: is now the "FAILED status quo".


We currently have a FAILED status quo. Most expensive, top heavy, bloated, who-knows-what-costs Labyrinth of bureaucratic paper pushing BS on top of the Doctor-patient relationship.

This further sets it.
 
2012-06-28 01:01:10 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Weaver95: Limbaugh is back to taking callers and i'm getting kinda hungry. so I'm done with Rush for the day. everything after the first hour is repetition anyways.

Thanks for taking the bullet for the team. I don't know how you stand it.


well...now that i've joined the ranks of the unemployed, I have a lot more free time than I did before.
 
2012-06-28 01:01:11 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.


The working poor are worse off because they lack health care. A majority of personal bankruptcies are caused by medical bills. Of those going bankrupt in 2007, the majority had insurance at some point, but they either lost it or the insurance company denied them. Obamacare is an attempt to fix these problems.

A monthly bill for health insurance, which can be budgeted and offset with vouchers, is doable for even poor families. A major health problem that comes out of nowhere and leads to a massive medical bill? Not so much.
 
2012-06-28 01:01:13 PM  

ZoSo_the_Crowe: Anyone know what the numbers are in relation to how you prove a financial hardship to become exempt from the penalties? $695 minimum penalty in 2016... that's a lot of money for some people.


And now I reply to myself: "Subtract those who would have to spend more than 8 percent of their family income on the cheapest qualifying health plan; they're exempt because of financial hardship."

Derp.
 
2012-06-28 01:01:46 PM  
Wow this things gonna get more posts than your average Monday night wrasslin thread.
 
2012-06-28 01:01:51 PM  
I love that Mitt Romney basically initiated this this type of plan in Massachusetts as governor, and it worked so well we decided to try it out on the whole country. And Mitt Romney is opposing it.
 
2012-06-28 01:02:02 PM  

Phinn: So, when do we get a fat tax? A lazy tax? An exercise-or-pay-up tax? Why should the expenses of healthy people be higher just because some people want to smoke and play video games and eat Cheetos all day long watching Judge Judy?


Roberts said you can't do that in that majority decision

/you always had "skin in the game" you just didn't realize it.
 
2012-06-28 01:02:14 PM  

colon_pow: this whole thing is history's largest bait-and-switch.


"BAZINGA!"

www.glittarazzi.com
 
2012-06-28 01:02:17 PM  

cman: NowhereMon: LOL free republic is melting down

And I bet ya Kos is having the biggest orgasm


So *that's* why my eye is stinging...
 
2012-06-28 01:02:18 PM  

mr.Curmudgeon: [i.imgur.com image 600x494]


Nice.
 
2012-06-28 01:02:20 PM  
Good for you Libs, glad you got a win.

Personally, I think it morally wrong to take money from one group of people to pay for anothers benefits, so single payer would have been better in my mind. But we get what we get.

Go team, lol.
 
2012-06-28 01:02:30 PM  

Chameleon: Actor_au: The Larch: Actor_

You're kidding right? Half a million dollars for a head injury? I can't imagine my parents paying that. They just retired and their life savings are around that much. A lifetime of saving to pay for one accident... thats just wrong on every level.

/Parents had insurance anyway but the public hospital had a better head injury unit than the private one.

No joke. A week in the ICU alone would likely leave you with over $100k hospital bill. Add in six weeks of brain trauma care and you'll be paying the rest of your life.

Don't worry, though! Your parents may not have needed to pay that much. After all, it's highly possible that your insurance wouldn't cover the brain injury, which means that your parents wouldn't have had the money to even get him in the door of the clinic in the first place.

/I spent two days in the hospital for pneumonia last year. No ICU, no surgery, just an ER visit, a room, and IV antibiotics. My bill was over $6000 for just those two days.


My wife was referred to the local hospital ER by her GP after she detected a possible blood clot in her leg. The ER doctor on call looked at it, said "no it's not" and sent her home. Cost: $800 that the insurance company didn't pay for because "no service had been done".

/yeah, we paid $800 for the priviledge of sitting in an ER for 4 hours and 10 minutes with a doctor
 
2012-06-28 01:02:31 PM  

jaylectricity: I love that Mitt Romney basically initiated this this type of plan in Massachusetts as governor, and it worked so well we decided to try it out on the whole country. And Mitt Romney is opposing it.


he was for it before he was against it. Because f*ck you, that's why!
 
2012-06-28 01:02:41 PM  

Phinn: Anti_illuminati: So if you chose not to have health insurance, you get hit by a truck and rack up medical costs you cannot afford, who pays for that? We do. Those that currently have health insurance. Your analogy is bad and you should feel bad.

No one should be forced to pay for anyone else's goods and services.

But now that we all have skin in the game, what happens when you get fat and incur lots of medical costs? Who pays for that? We do.

So, when do we get a fat tax? A lazy tax? An exercise-or-pay-up tax? Why should the expenses of healthy people be higher just because some people want to smoke and play video games and eat Cheetos all day long watching Judge Judy?


Jesus Christ. You can't be serious. Did you work this statement through your head completely before typing? If you have medical insurance and you get fat and incur medical costs due to diabetes (for example) medical insurance pays for it. What the hell kind of point are you making? Are you really grasping at straws to try to show a "slippery slope" scenario?
 
2012-06-28 01:03:35 PM  
Bwahahaha!

i.huffpost.com
 
2012-06-28 01:03:48 PM  

Brandyelf: Freepervillle is trying to spike the online poll at WCBV in Boston (about halfway down the page on the left).

Show them we can do better, Fark.

My VCOM (Very Conservative Office Mate) is flipping over today's decision. I asked him if he hated the freedom of insuring his kids (he has a lot) until they're 26. He said of course not. I asked him if my daughter, who has a pre-existing condition (asthma) should be denied insurance when she becomes independent because of that. He said of course not. I then asked what he objected to, and he told me we were all going to lose our insurance and be forced to buy government insurance and we wouldn't be allowed to see our own doctors anymore, but would instead have to go to whomever the government tells us to. Plus we would have to pay thousands more every year to pay for insurance for illegal immigrants.

This is how people "think".


That is very generous of you to call that thinking.
 
2012-06-28 01:03:56 PM  

Igor Jakovsky: Wow this things gonna get more posts than your average Monday night wrasslin thread.


People love coming out for a worked spectacle.
 
2012-06-28 01:04:00 PM  

Brandyelf: Freepervillle is trying to spike the online poll at WCBV in Boston (about halfway down the page on the left).

Show them we can do better, Fark.


Anybody else get a picture at the middle-right of that page that looks like a female Sloth?
 
2012-06-28 01:04:34 PM  

jayhawk88: Man I can't wait until my nutjob extended family members get home tonight and start tearing up Facebook.


sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-06-28 01:04:34 PM  

Brandyelf: Freepervillle is trying to spike the online poll at WCBV in Boston (about halfway down the page on the left).

Show them we can do better, Fark.

My VCOM (Very Conservative Office Mate) is flipping over today's decision. I asked him if he hated the freedom of insuring his kids (he has a lot) until they're 26. He said of course not. I asked him if my daughter, who has a pre-existing condition (asthma) should be denied insurance when she becomes independent because of that. He said of course not. I then asked what he objected to, and he told me we were all going to lose our insurance and be forced to buy government insurance and we wouldn't be allowed to see our own doctors anymore, but would instead have to go to whomever the government tells us to. Plus we would have to pay thousands more every year to pay for insurance for illegal immigrants.

This is how people "think".


I'm having a similar debate with someone on Facebook. We've whittled it down to him agreeing that everything is great about ObamaCare except the individual mandate, which is against his freedom or something. That one I'm having trouble with, because that's more in the realm of belief and it's tough to debate in that area.
 
2012-06-28 01:04:39 PM  

derpdeederp: Good for you Libs, glad you got a win.

Personally, I think it morally wrong to take money from one group of people to pay for anothers benefits, so single payer would have been better in my mind. But we get what we get.

Go team, lol.


Cool story bro. I think its morally wrong to let people die or go into life crushing debt because they can't afford medical care.

Morals are funny.
 
2012-06-28 01:05:00 PM  
Republicans Should Introduce Free Republic is farking awesome right now.

"Buy this or else be taxed..." Laws
June 28, 2012, 12:00:49 PM CDT · by CodeToad
6/28/2012 | CodeToad
Since the government can now demand citizens buy something or else be taxed for it, and we have previously said this on FR but I wanted to re-introduce it, the Republicans should mandate the following taxes. Buy this Or Else Be Taxed: 1. Guns, one per year per family. Tax for not doing so: $1,000. 2. A Bible, one for each family member. Penalty: $1,000 per Bible not purchased.
 
2012-06-28 01:05:06 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: Klippoklondike: ha-ha-guy: someonelse: The Romney campaign has vastly overestimated the number of Americans who consider having health care insurance to be an attack on their freedom. They're about to find this out.

Wasn't Romneycare one the more popular pieces of Romney's legacy in Mass? Now they're basically attacking it on a national scale. All that seems to do is make the red states more red, and the swings go "Oh fark no".

I don't like Obamacare for the the simple fact that I must have health insurance. I think the problem with health care costs should be solved by looking at the HEALTH CARE COSTS rather than forcing everyone into using a middleman (insurance). However, I can't stand Romney and his lies about what this does. He insinuates people won't have a choice over what insurance they'll get (they will have a choice) and insinuates it is bankrupting medicare (this basically replaces it, that's why it takes money away from it). Of course this is hilarious considering he passed something nearly identical in Massachusetts. I do like that this bill forces insurance companies to be somewhat responsible by making them use all that premium money to actually pay for medication and procedures. That is a good thing. I just don't want to be forced to have health insurance.

In short, this bill is stupid and Romney is just using it as political ammunation. The end.

while your notion wjile noble and commended is a fallacy for the simple reason that not everyone is independently rich, honest and can pay out of pocket for medical expenses therefore it just isn;t going to work.

Sure not forcing people to have heath care is freedom in it;s absolute finest BUT in reality honor and altruisitic intentions doesn't hold a candle to when someone is very sick and he needs to get some really $$$$ surgery and he makes $50K


This is a very good point. I do think a cap would help a good deal, though you are right it would be far from a complete fix.

bugontherug: Klippoklondike: I say put a cap on the price of procedures and medication, though I know this will never happen. It if it did happen (it never will) Big pharma would still make a profit, just not a ridiculously huge profit.

Capping med prices is plausible, if done properly. I don't know how you could rationally cap the cost of a procedure, because it seems to me there are too many variables.


This is also a good point. I suppose we could start with the med prices and go from there. We could cross reference with other 1st world nations and see what their costs of procedures are and see if there's any way we could come down a little to match.
 
2012-06-28 01:05:29 PM  
img805.imageshack.us

/Still my favorite.
 
2012-06-28 01:05:36 PM  

sweetmelissa31: Jackson Herring: What a boner that was! Can you believe that time GHWB pulled that huge boner?

That boner of his really cost him. He lost the race to Clinton who promised, "Read my lips, no new boners." But then sure enough, he made an even bigger boner.


www.redshirt.co.uk

Not impressed.
 
2012-06-28 01:05:56 PM  
Who gives a shiat if it is a 'tax'? Do you really think that anyone but the most teabagging, hover riding, purple heart bandaid wearing Tea Partier is going to care?
How is that even a counter-argument?
 
2012-06-28 01:05:59 PM  

mr lawson: mrshowrules: /then find out it is about 50% cheaper actually

it won't happen. There is a provision in the bill that states 80% (maybe 85%?) of premiums have to go toward providing care. The problem is it is a "percentage". The hospitals will jack up their prices and the insurance comps will jack up their premiums to compensate.


I was referring to the US adopting single-payer. There would be some modest short term reductions 20%-30% but it would allow you to keep help care costs in line with general cost of living increases. Make it sustainable which should be the real focus.

Obama's fix although needed will do nothing to control increases in insurance premiums that are insane compared to general inflation.
 
2012-06-28 01:05:59 PM  

mrshowrules: Lost Thought 00: I'm sure it won't be long until at least one governor of a southern state declares their intention to secede from the union.

Arizona is my bet. No one will try and stop them either. My in-laws have a house there (Canadian) but one hassles them because they aren't brown.


If Arizona secedes, does America still have to send Social Security checks to Arizona residents?
 
2012-06-28 01:06:07 PM  

LiberalEastCoastElitist: 3. Roberts?!


Naw, Roberts is still a far right conservative activist. Now we know he's also smart enough to hide it sometimes.

How do I know he's a far right conservative activist?

He dissented from Monday's opinion holding that life without parole is inappropriate for child offenders on the grounds of "legislative deference." But he still said Congress deserves when regulating the economy to provide for the health of its citizens. So, Justice Roberts:

locking up kids forever = GREAT!
providing for health of people = BOO!
 
2012-06-28 01:06:28 PM  

make me some tea: Brandyelf: Freepervillle is trying to spike the online poll at WCBV in Boston (about halfway down the page on the left).

Show them we can do better, Fark.

My VCOM (Very Conservative Office Mate) is flipping over today's decision. I asked him if he hated the freedom of insuring his kids (he has a lot) until they're 26. He said of course not. I asked him if my daughter, who has a pre-existing condition (asthma) should be denied insurance when she becomes independent because of that. He said of course not. I then asked what he objected to, and he told me we were all going to lose our insurance and be forced to buy government insurance and we wouldn't be allowed to see our own doctors anymore, but would instead have to go to whomever the government tells us to. Plus we would have to pay thousands more every year to pay for insurance for illegal immigrants.

This is how people "think".

I'm having a similar debate with someone on Facebook. We've whittled it down to him agreeing that everything is great about ObamaCare except the individual mandate, which is against his freedom or something. That one I'm having trouble with, because that's more in the realm of belief and it's tough to debate in that area.


Ask him what should be down with people show up to the ER with no ability to pay and no insurance.
 
2012-06-28 01:06:29 PM  
Roberts was originally appointed to the court as a replacement for O'Connor (before Rehnquist's retirement bumped his nomination up to Chief Justice). At the time, the Bush administration made a conscious decision to replace her by a more moderate conservative instead of an Alito/Scalia/Thomas type one.

Guess they've learned their lesson now. All hard right-wingers, all the time from here on out.
 
2012-06-28 01:06:32 PM  

draa: wraithmare: I love that Freeper posts calling for blood to be spilled and open revolution are being pulled by moderators. Why does the Free Republic hate the First Amendment?!?! WHAR MY RIGHTS??? WHAR???

They missed one.

FreeRepublic:America Crosses The Rubicon
Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:05:27 AM · by Wuli · 1 replies
June 28, 2012 | Wuli
In American history, June 28, 2012 is a day that will go down in infamy. The nation may have just crossed the Rubicon between the Liberty for which it was founded and social and political hell. Only the most massive citizen uprising since the revolution can set the record straight. Quit complaining, quit sitting on the sidelines watching and get working in any and every way you can. It's no longer up to the little dictators in judges robes, it's up to us.


Sweet, sweet, impotent butthurt.
farm2.static.flickr.com
likely depiction of Wuli
 
2012-06-28 01:06:33 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Rwa2play: xanadian: *saunters into thread*

[narwhaler.com image 469x453]

Problem, GOP?

I can only begin to imagine the conservative butthurt today...

Believe me, it's bigger than you can imagine

/moar trollface

I haven't seen Butthurt so big since John Holmes plugged Bruce Villanch.


I haven't seen butthurt so big since Zed brought out the Gimp.
 
2012-06-28 01:07:12 PM  

hinten: Who gives a shiat if it is a 'tax'? Do you really think that anyone but the most teabagging, hover riding, purple heart bandaid wearing Tea Partier is going to care?
How is that even a counter-argument?


It's going to fail.
 
2012-06-28 01:07:34 PM  

Oreamnos: I would never imply that I really fully understand this bill/law/whatever and all of its ramifications. I'm generally left-leaning but I'm not sure I think requiring insurance or else facing a penalty is a good and just thing. But I do believe that our so-called "system" for health care and payment as-is is a huge clusterfark, and so some change, even bad, is needed. If it gets worse, at some point it will actually get better. It will take too long for a lot of people, but I believe this.



Yeah that basically sums it up for me as well. Romneycare is one of the top 1000 reasons I never liked Romney. I'm not sure it was ever a good idea on a state level. I am not sure it is a good idea on a national level.

But then, what we've had up to now wasn't working well for today's society either. So we'll see if this stirs the pot enough to come up with something that eventually works. I view this as a breaking through the inertial barrier of doing nothing, which is all that has happened up to now. It's like the poor idea that will eventually end up causing better ideas to replace it. Which is better than doing nothing.
 
2012-06-28 01:07:36 PM  
What's really sad is not whether or not it was upheld it is there not one source that spells out the pros and cons without it being intertwined with what this means for the politicians.

I could give a fark about politicians and the games they play to maintain their status. I just want a source to give me the facts and projected good and bad impacts without all the drama.
 
2012-06-28 01:07:41 PM  

barneyfifesbullet: Yet another way this decision screws Obama.....

This decision totally removes the liberal talking point that everyone must vote for Obama because of judges. The Supreme Court as a November issue is totally gone.


No way in hell that is gone. Still an issue
 
2012-06-28 01:07:53 PM  
Coelacanth 2012-06-28 11:04:33 AM


I have a happy -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzF_y039slk

[dances happily with Ancient Fishy]

www.dinofish.com

cutearoo.com
 
2012-06-28 01:08:09 PM  

bugontherug: LiberalEastCoastElitist: 3. Roberts?!

Naw, Roberts is still a far right conservative activist. Now we know he's also smart enough to hide it sometimes.

How do I know he's a far right conservative activist?

He dissented from Monday's opinion holding that life without parole is inappropriate for child offenders on the grounds of "legislative deference." But he still said Congress deserves no such deference when regulating the economy to provide for the health of its citizens. So, Justice Roberts:

locking up kids forever = GREAT!
providing for health of people = BOO!

 
2012-06-28 01:08:36 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.


Are you always this dense?

The 'working poor' don't make enough income to have to buy insurance under ACA.

As a small business owner, I base hiring decisions on sales, not overhead. Claims that ACA will stifle hiring are BS.

I and every other tax-paying American is already paying for health care for the poor and working poor -- the ACA won't change that one iota.

What WILL happen is that some 30+ million more Americans will start paying into the health care money pool, possibly reducing actual costs on average, but certainly helping offset current budget deficits.

"My side" didn't win...America won.
 
2012-06-28 01:08:49 PM  

mrshowrules: I was referring to the US adopting single-payer. There would be some modest short term reductions 20%-30% but it would allow you to keep help care costs in line with general cost of living increases. Make it sustainable which should be the real focus.

Obama's fix although needed will do nothing to control increases in insurance premiums that are insane compared to general inflation.


Agree on all points
 
2012-06-28 01:09:13 PM  
Lest we forget the mandate was necessary because Republicans wouldn't support a public option. This was the compromise to the compromise Republicans forced.
 
2012-06-28 01:09:17 PM  

CPennypacker: SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.

Sounds like your team lost.


We all lost today. The oligarchs, specifically the insurance industry, are the only ones who won, which is not surprising, since they wrote the damn thing. Every time Congress ups the tax, they'll raise their rates accordingly. They've all got to be jizzing themselves right now.

Pyrrhic victory, folks. Believe it.
 
2012-06-28 01:09:38 PM  
www.lackenbauer.ca

Dear America,

I might be dead, but I'm proud of you.

- Tommy Douglas
 
2012-06-28 01:09:39 PM  

ontariolightning: Does this mean US joined the rest of the civilized world? kicking and screaming?

Does this mean you wont have to pay for doctor appointments?


Embrace the metric system!
 
2012-06-28 01:10:02 PM  
i.huffpost.com
 
2012-06-28 01:10:13 PM  

hinten: Who gives a shiat if it is a 'tax'? Do you really think that anyone but the most teabagging, hover riding, purple heart bandaid wearing Tea Partier is going to care?
How is that even a counter-argument?


Because it's a word of power, and they despise that they didn't have as big of a chance to use it during the debate over the law.

The net effect is the same, either way, but because the administration successfully avoided all the prejudice associated with the word "tax" during the debate - they feel cheated.
 
2012-06-28 01:10:20 PM  

inner ted: /the lib jack off fest here is priceless in it's ignorance.


I give you points for style.
 
Displayed 50 of 3382 comments

First | « | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | » | Last

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report