Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(American Thinker)   We just saw the Court sanction unlimited taxation on behavior and give permission to lie about it at the same time   (americanthinker.com ) divider line
    More: Sad, punishments, Charles Krauthammer, supreme courts, Ways and Means Committee, Turbotax  
•       •       •

2144 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Jun 2012 at 9:30 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-06-29 10:36:45 AM  

incendi: Edsel: RealDisagreer: the real response to it should be this. The ruling hasn't solved anything and has taken the decision out of the hands of the SCOTUS. This is the best bit of trolling I've ever seen by a judge. By calling it a tax, it's now allowed to be challenged after the first revenues have been collected. It is much easier to strike it down now than it was to repeal it as a pieec of legislation. I'm not sure why the GOP isn't very pleased with the outcome.

Uh, no. You don't appear to understand how the AIA works.

Yep. They even went so far as to clearly explain that bit in the actual opinion, which it seems he hasn't even made an attempt to actually read.


Roberts only really directed his attention to the Direct Tax, not the various other constitutional forms of taxation. There is definitely a possible challenge to that fact. And as the Government lawyers did not argue the constitutionality of the tax, it is still grounds for rehearings on those items.
 
2012-06-29 10:37:07 AM  

palelizard: hubiestubert: Pretty much for the same reason that we all pay into systems for the general welfare. You may not need unemployment, but you pay in, just in case. And in the meantime, you help keep the system solvent for folks who do need it now. You may not use all the US Interstate system, but you certainly do rely on the services and goods that are transported along those routes. You may never need a fire department, but it's nice to keep it funded.

And if that common-sense rationale doesn't work, you can always remind the nay-sayers that even if they never use the system at all, they're better off if their neighbors have the safety-net. After all, people with very little left to lose tend to start looking at people who've got plenty and wondering how much force it will take to switch places.

Fear will keep them in line. All of them.


We have unemployment insurance for a reason. To keep utilities paid. To keep rents paid. To keep food being bought, and to keep folks from slipping off the radar entirely. Unemployment isn't just for the guy who loses his job, but to KEEP the businesses around him paid as well. Unemployment doesn't cover a lot, but it keeps the lights on and the rent paid until folks can find work. It's not just for the benefit if the guy who loses his job, but for all those around him as well.
 
2012-06-29 10:37:37 AM  

MyRandomName: There are lots of alternatives to the ACA bill


towleroad.typepad.com
 
2012-06-29 10:37:52 AM  

qorkfiend: IlGreven: hubiestubert: IlGreven: Fear the Clam: There's nothing stopping companies from writing policies for private, supplemental, insurance for those too scared of gub'mint healthcare. There's nothing stopping doctors from having a practice that doesn't accept government insurance. Everyone wins.

No, everyone loses, because the bolded fact would make government insurance untenable. Give 'em the option to opt out, and they will, because it will always be more profitable to not accept government insurance that they believe won't pay full price than a private insurance that'll pay more for more things.

Good luck with that. No, really. Good luck with that. Keep blowing that particular horn, because you may just discover an odd thing about market forces, that they don't just flow one way...

Well, then, kiss government insurance good-bye, because no one will buy it.

Why not?


I love this logic.

"The free market has to provide health care! If the government offers health care, even with the free market also offering it through private insurance, people will go to it and private insurance will die!"

"... wouldn't that be a result of the free market? People using a service they find both more affordable and that suits their needs? If it didn't, wouldn't they just stick with private insurance?"

"SOCIALISM!!!!!! TAXES!"
 
2012-06-29 10:38:33 AM  

pueblonative: Looks like the wahhhmbulance will be working overtime this weekend.


If the decision had gone the other way I'm sure the libs would take the opportunity to show what it means to be good sports.
 
2012-06-29 10:38:56 AM  

Shaggy_C: Infernalist: So, you went from being a hardcore GOPer to a 'push-button' leftist between 2004 and 2008(even though you didn't VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRAT IN THAT ELECTION), and then even though you DIDN'T VOTE DEMOCRAT, you grew 'disillusioned' by the man you didn't vote for and became an angry leftist.

I donated to, campaigned for, and ultimately voted for Obama in 2008, fool.


Ahh, you jumped into my conversation with cman. Didn't even notice the name of the poster. lol@me

Disregard my post then.
 
2012-06-29 10:39:00 AM  

hubiestubert: We have unemployment insurance for a reason. To keep utilities paid. To keep rents paid. To keep food being bought, and to keep folks from slipping off the radar entirely. Unemployment isn't just for the guy who loses his job, but to KEEP the businesses around him paid as well. Unemployment doesn't cover a lot, but it keeps the lights on and the rent paid until folks can find work. It's not just for the benefit if the guy who loses his job, but for all those around him as well.


Shut up! All business happens in a vacuum! We need job creators! The lower class doesn't have skin in the game! Every man is an island!
 
2012-06-29 10:39:16 AM  

qorkfiend: IlGreven: hubiestubert: IlGreven: Fear the Clam: There's nothing stopping companies from writing policies for private, supplemental, insurance for those too scared of gub'mint healthcare. There's nothing stopping doctors from having a practice that doesn't accept government insurance. Everyone wins.

No, everyone loses, because the bolded fact would make government insurance untenable. Give 'em the option to opt out, and they will, because it will always be more profitable to not accept government insurance that they believe won't pay full price than a private insurance that'll pay more for more things.

Good luck with that. No, really. Good luck with that. Keep blowing that particular horn, because you may just discover an odd thing about market forces, that they don't just flow one way...

Well, then, kiss government insurance good-bye, because no one will buy it.

Why not?


Because apparently all family practices are so rolling in money that they can just turn down getting paid by a ton of patients. Hospitals too. Not like they have bills to pay or that private insurance has any paperwork to fill out, or turn around times on submitting bills and getting paid...

Truly, it is the best of all possible worlds...
 
2012-06-29 10:39:27 AM  

coco ebert: Edsel: coco ebert: I haven't read the thread, but TF Lawyer types, I have a question. Who decides who writes the majority opinion and does it necessarily reflect the legal views of all who voted yea (or nay)? Is there a possibility that only Roberts views this as a taxation issue while the others see it differently and can they issue their own statement?

Roberts assigns the opinion. Ginsburg, however, made it clear separately that the liberal justices thought that the mandate was constitutional under the Commerce Clause anyway and didn't have to be considered a tax. So yeah, Roberts basically was the only one pushing the view of the mandate as being a tax.

Interesting, thanks.

The only hint I had of things going this way was an interview with some court watcher who said that chief justices tend to not like a high number of split decisions and will often swing their vote one way or another to make the vote seem less divided. That's not really the case here but it does show how the chief justice felt a certain degree of anxiety over how the Court is viewed and the real-life repercussions of overturning this law coming back to bite the conservative justices in the ass.


There are a lot of fascinating sidebars here regarding how the votes went... for example, plenty were surprised that Kennedy stuck with the right wing, so it could be that Roberts tried to bring him along but failed. It's also been suggested that Roberts initially was with the right wing but switched sides, as it seemed to some like Scalia's opinion was written as though it was supposed to be the majority opinion. Also, some have suggested that Roberts went with the liberals in exchange for their agreement on the Medicaid expansion opinion.
 
2012-06-29 10:39:35 AM  
www.deanjustisswheeler.com
 
2012-06-29 10:39:47 AM  

cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......


www.studenthandouts.com
 
2012-06-29 10:39:50 AM  

IlGreven: Well, then, kiss government insurance good-bye, because no one will buy it.


Oh they would.

vinniethepoo: Let doctors opt out of accepting gummint insurance if they want to.


Why the sam hell would you do something that stupid?

coco ebert: Interesting, thanks.


Also every justice can write their own opinion for a decision. There are some notable cases where you'll have 3 or 4 opinions. Then there's Roe v Wade, where there are opinions from every single justice.
 
2012-06-29 10:40:46 AM  

Zeno-25: cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......

[www.studenthandouts.com image 417x323]


My high-school biology teacher amended this slightly. She said the only two certain things are staying your color and death.

She was not happy when we brought up Michael Jackson.
 
2012-06-29 10:40:55 AM  
I had another question in addition to the one I had above.

FTFA: It must have escaped Roberts that you can avoid making income -- which is ironic, since many of the folks celebrating his ruling avoid just that. And he missed that you can also avoid buying gas. Heck, Obama's energy secretary avoids that. But now, under Roberts's own theory and using Roberts's own words, you and I cannot avoid buying insurance without being taxed as a result. And as we mentioned, our Treasury secretary -- not to mention the former Ways and Means Committee chair -- manages to avoid being taxed.

If you don't have a (reported) income and don't file taxes, do you not avoid paying this tax?
 
2012-06-29 10:41:36 AM  

St_Francis_P: verbaltoxin: The GOP has done its damnedest to ensure my generation and below votes liberal or claims "libertarian" so nobody has to associate with the embarrasing "conservative" label.

Be assured they're doing a fine job on the rest of us, too. The GOP has gone from the party of William F. Buckley to the party of Rush Limbaugh. Can't explain that.


It's explainable. My hunch is in essence, the Republican Party's old Southern Strategy of making religion and social issues part of its planks resulted long term in a generational divide. Older Republicans have to toe this anti-intellectual line that eschews critical thinking and even the laws of physics themselves. I just don't think as many younger conservatives have problems with things like the age of the Earth, how humans became humans, abortion, gay marriage, and so on. They are still right wing when it comes to economics, defense, and energy, but they are starting to wonder if the current, elected leadership if the right is functionally retarded, or has spent too many years playing to the rubes.

Doing things the old way has resulted so far in two, notable electoral defeats in 2006 and 2008, a limp resurgence in 2010, and then a dragged-out affair over healthcare reform that saw a gasping defeat in 2012. All this and their Presidential candidate is a quantum robot. A super majority in the Senate is not likely in the cards either. "Repeal and replace" is empty consolation.

There just isn't much for them to cheer about these days. They are most powerful at the state level at the moment, but that won't last either if the states they control become more dependent on federal funds to keep the lights on, which is what's happening in the so-called red states.
 
2012-06-29 10:41:38 AM  

ohdoublereally: If the decision had gone the other way I'm sure the libs would take the opportunity to show what it means to be good sports.


wat?

Anyway, I think those stupid Libs were prepared for it to be ruled unconstutional. As mrshowrules screen capped in another thread, Cons were totally unprepared for this scenario and you can tell by all the: "America is destroyed", "I am moving to Canada to escape socialism" responses.
 
2012-06-29 10:41:46 AM  

Bloody William: hubiestubert: We have unemployment insurance for a reason. To keep utilities paid. To keep rents paid. To keep food being bought, and to keep folks from slipping off the radar entirely. Unemployment isn't just for the guy who loses his job, but to KEEP the businesses around him paid as well. Unemployment doesn't cover a lot, but it keeps the lights on and the rent paid until folks can find work. It's not just for the benefit if the guy who loses his job, but for all those around him as well.

Shut up! All business happens in a vacuum! We need job creators! The lower class doesn't have skin in the game! Every man is an island!


Sorry. My brand of Conservatism is perhaps outdated. I should have really gotten the Quaylebot 2.0 upgrade, but there were compatability issues with the Snowe-MC Smith-Maineiac firmware...
 
2012-06-29 10:42:19 AM  

qorkfiend: My high-school biology teacher amended this slightly. She said the only two certain things are staying your color and death.

She was not happy when we brought up Michael Jackson.


Michael Jackson proves that white people absolutely own the crime of pedophilia.
 
2012-06-29 10:42:19 AM  

Zeno-25: www.studenthandouts.com


Heh Roberts actually quotes that very saying in his opinion.
 
2012-06-29 10:43:30 AM  

starsrift: I had another question in addition to the one I had above.

FTFA: It must have escaped Roberts that you can avoid making income -- which is ironic, since many of the folks celebrating his ruling avoid just that. And he missed that you can also avoid buying gas. Heck, Obama's energy secretary avoids that. But now, under Roberts's own theory and using Roberts's own words, you and I cannot avoid buying insurance without being taxed as a result. And as we mentioned, our Treasury secretary -- not to mention the former Ways and Means Committee chair -- manages to avoid being taxed.

If you don't have a (reported) income and don't file taxes, do you not avoid paying this tax?


I believe so. The law specifies that the IRS can't use a couple of its standard punishments; they can't assess fines or put levies on property for non-payment. Basically all they can do is withhold your tax refund, and if your refund is less than the penalty...

However, if you skip filing your tax return or lie on it, the IRS will probably take issue with that.
 
2012-06-29 10:43:32 AM  

ohdoublereally: pueblonative: Looks like the wahhhmbulance will be working overtime this weekend.

If the decision had gone the other way I'm sure the libs would take the opportunity to show what it means to be good sports.


Are you kidding? The GOP had already bought THREE metric ass-tons of balloons and streamers and were hiring a DJ for the "Screw you, Barry" party that they were planning all this week.

They were already celebrating behind closed doors. They were already rubbing it in the faces of the Democrats everywhere.

So, when the GOP end up losing at the last second, you'll forgive the Dems for going a lil 'in your face!' in return.
 
2012-06-29 10:43:34 AM  

cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......


Wow, what a farking retarded statement. Uh, that principle has been part of this country's law since BEFORE the Constitution. We now live in a country where they can tax our behavior? OH NOES!!!
 
2012-06-29 10:43:41 AM  

cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......


because taxing cigarettes, single people, liquor and giving tax credits for buying SUV's never existed before

and you wonder why people don't take you seriously
 
2012-06-29 10:43:50 AM  

vinniethepoo: Let doctors opt out of accepting gummint insurance if they want to. Tax those who do so an additional 20%, and give those who opt in a tax break.


I don't understand why doctors would have a problem with Obamacare. It means that more people will be covered by insurance and thus more people will be able to see a doctor which means more patients that will be able to pay because they have insurance. Granted, I'm not a doctor so maybe I'm missing something here. But I always thought it was good for business to have more paying customers?
 
2012-06-29 10:44:39 AM  

MyRandomName:

And this is the bland partisan blindness I was talking about in my last post. There are lots of alternatives to the ACA bill, which was such a tangled mash of competing regulations and taxes that even many liberals don't like it. Pretending ACA is the only alternative is a laughable assertion. The fact is that coverage has to be leveraged against costs. Currently there are ballooning costs in Medicare and Medicaid due to items ranging from fraud, increased insurance for malpractice, over payments, unnecessary tests to cover liability, etc. The GOP focused on adding those items to the ACA bill and they were ALL REJECTED by the Democrats because of their connections to strong lawyer lobbies. The DNC will never except reform due to their intransigent connections to that lawyer lobby as well as various other lobbies. If you want a real healthcare package it has to be both reform as well as expansion. Expansion by itself will not work monetarily.


WTF are you talking about?
 
2012-06-29 10:44:43 AM  

Infernalist: ohdoublereally: pueblonative: Looks like the wahhhmbulance will be working overtime this weekend.

If the decision had gone the other way I'm sure the libs would take the opportunity to show what it means to be good sports.

Are you kidding? The GOP had already bought THREE metric ass-tons of balloons and streamers and were hiring a DJ for the "Screw you, Barry" party that they were planning all this week.

They were already celebrating behind closed doors. They were already rubbing it in the faces of the Democrats everywhere.

So, when the GOP end up losing at the last second, you'll forgive the Dems for going a lil 'in your face!' in return.


This week? They were planning it for months.

I think the right was caught entirely off-guard with this decision, and it's hilarious.
 
2012-06-29 10:44:45 AM  

starsrift: If you don't have a (reported) income and don't file taxes, do you not avoid paying this tax?


You don't pay it if you don't make enough income to pay taxes, if paying for insurance would represent more than 8% of your gross income and other factors. Also anyone who has insurance doesn't pay it.
 
2012-06-29 10:45:14 AM  

NateGrey: ohdoublereally: If the decision had gone the other way I'm sure the libs would take the opportunity to show what it means to be good sports.

wat?

Anyway, I think those stupid Libs were prepared for it to be ruled unconstutional. As mrshowrules screen capped in another thread, Cons were totally unprepared for this scenario and you can tell by all the: "America is destroyed", "I am moving to Canada to escape socialism" responses.


Pretty much...

Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances.
 
2012-06-29 10:45:32 AM  

cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......


This is not a repeat from when cigarette taxes were introduced. Or when gasoline taxes were introduced. Or when liquor taxes were introduced.
 
2012-06-29 10:46:06 AM  

hubiestubert: Erix: Weaver95: i'm not sure the GOP has figured out exactly what the propaganda spin on this issue is supposed to be: Limbaugh was saying that 'Obama lied' and that SCOTUS just handed the GOP a victory. others in the GOP blogosphere are saying they're going to move to canada, or shoot Justice Roberts, or 'go galt'. there's a persistent fantasy among some GOP voters that the Republicans can just dummy up another lawsuit next year and automagically repeal Obamacare in 2013-14.

Weaver, I really assumed you'd be against Obamacare. I had you pegged as a libertarian, and this is a pretty significant intrusion of government into people's lives, regardless of if it's for good reasons on not. I'm curious why you're not pissed that the government can now tax the absence of a particular behavior. Or is it just that most republicans have gotten so ridiculously polarized that it's just more fun to see them scream?

/an honest question from a libby lib.

Pretty much for the same reason that we all pay into systems for the general welfare. You may not need unemployment, but you pay in, just in case. And in the meantime, you help keep the system solvent for folks who do need it now. You may not use all the US Interstate system, but you certainly do rely on the services and goods that are transported along those routes. You may never need a fire department, but it's nice to keep it funded.

It's not a matter of immediate benefit, but promoting the general welfare, in the very much classic sense. It would be better to have a single payer system, and dig the middle men out entirely, because the hodge podge of standards are what drive up costs, necessitating hospitals and even family practitioners to cover their asses with all sorts of legal protection, and that adds on cost. We have an inefficient system, and the Romney health care plan which Obama's is partially based on passed on the merit that it essentially gave away HUGE amounts of money to private insurers. While the in ...


This is why you're green.
 
2012-06-29 10:46:15 AM  
To all you calling this a tax, thank you for agreeing that it is Constitutional.

For all you calling it a fine, thank you for admitting that Obama has never raised your taxes.
 
2012-06-29 10:46:43 AM  

qorkfiend: I believe so. The law specifies that the IRS can't use a couple of its standard punishments; they can't assess fines or put levies on property for non-payment. Basically all they can do is withhold your tax refund, and if your refund is less than the penalty...

However, if you skip filing your tax return or lie on it, the IRS will probably take issue with that.


Thanks. I mean, I know that it's all speculation until these penalty taxes start being imposed, but, you know, one is inspired to ask questions. Especially when it's Daily Fail or American Thinker or The Blaze quality derp. That seems to make the most sense.
 
2012-06-29 10:46:52 AM  

Pincy: I don't understand why doctors would have a problem with Obamacare. I


I have friends who are doctors. They should stop grinning in the next few weeks. Maybe. Seriously, they all support the law, because it provides for more people have insurance, makes sure insurance companies aren't dumping people overboard etc etc.
 
2012-06-29 10:48:27 AM  
unexplained bacon:
what would you do about heathcare in the US?

I think single payer is a better option than Obamacare, but it's not happening...yet.
what do you see as a better alternative? repealing Obamacare I get, it's the replace part I don't think is realistic, mostly because the people calling for this have nothing to replace it with, am I wrong?

Glad you asked!

First, let's remember that 89% of Americans are already satisified with their coverage. But to improve things:

1. Pay doctors to be doctors and nothing else. No more doctor owned heart hospitals, surger centers, imagining centers, etc. They strip the high margin business and better insured patients out of regular hospitals and have a perverse incentive to self-refer.
2. Modify EMTALA. We don't treat sniffles at the ER anymore.
3. Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC. At my house (maybe yours too) a good 90% of primary care visits are to get prescriptions for basic sinus and upper respiratory infections. That alone elminates millions of unnecessary doctor visits.

Others feel free to add to the list.
 
2012-06-29 10:49:37 AM  

cchris_39: 2. Modify EMTALA. We don't treat sniffles at the ER anymore.


*facepalm* of all the things to reform, that would not be one of them.
 
2012-06-29 10:50:29 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Pincy: I don't understand why doctors would have a problem with Obamacare. I

I have friends who are doctors. They should stop grinning in the next few weeks. Maybe. Seriously, they all support the law, because it provides for more people have insurance, makes sure insurance companies aren't dumping people overboard etc etc.


Most docs are hostages in this whole damned thing. They just want to fix people and in a perfect world, they'd do it for free of charge.

It's the insurance companies that are constantly throwing people out, denying them coverage, pushing second/third rate care at people who are in desperate need of better help.
 
2012-06-29 10:50:38 AM  

Infernalist: Erix: Infernalist: Lovely. So, you were a die-hard GOPer until your sister came out of the closet and made the whole 'evil gayz' thing very personal to you.

I take comfort in the fact that if your sister hadn't come out of the closet, you'd still be a GOPer.

Thanks for outing yourself as a cock. I started out as a republican, then a libertarian, and now I usually vote for the democrats. I was raised in a very conservative, Christian household, and it took me a while to grow up enough to develop my own positions. Sometimes it takes something like your sister coming out of the closet to make you re-examine your ideals.
I didn't realize that if you aren't born with a particular ideology you'll never rid yourself of the stink of the other side. This is just as bad as the farking "RINO" screamers in the GOP.

Mad, bro?

Here's the deal, son: If it takes a personal investment for you to challenge your political ideals, THEN YOU'RE A HYPOCRITE. If it takes a sister coming out as gay for you to challenge your homophobia and close-minded hatred of a harmless bunch of people who just WANT TO BE LEFT THE FARK ALONE, then you're an intellectual and political coward.

DICK CHENEY came out in favor of gay rights only after his daughter came out of the closet. Cman has put himself into the same category as Dick farking Cheney.

By the way, congrats on claiming a hold on political sanity by abandoning the GOP and the lol-libertarians.


Seriously? So you need to be born and raised with a particular ideology or you're a hypocrite? That's BS. It's absurd to expect people to have examined every aspect of their political beliefs in complete detail by the time they're 20. My family was conservative and Christian, but extremely reasonable (yes, it's possible), and didn't give me much cause to rebel. It took time and independence to figure out where I actually stood on a number of issues, so I can't expect everyone else to have already gone through that difficult stage just because I have.

I used to think one of the great things about the left was the embracing of relativism and the rejection of absolutism, but I've been seeing almost as many puristic tendencies from the left lately.

/and you can keep your "son" shiat; it's pretty unoriginal.
 
2012-06-29 10:52:18 AM  

cchris_39: Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC


I know Republicans dont like science, but there is something about antibiotics and it being freely available for everyone at anytime.
 
2012-06-29 10:52:26 AM  
Ither

ohdoublereally: pueblonative: Looks like the wahhhmbulance will be working overtime this weekend.

If the decision had gone the other way I'm sure the libs would take the opportunity to show what it means to ibe good sports.


Either that or pushed for Medicare for all. You see when you have a game plan you're much less likely to throw a temper tantrum.
 
2012-06-29 10:53:06 AM  
"Many, many states are not going to be able to afford expansion of Medicaid and these exchanges that are going to try to be forced down states' throats through 'ObamaCare.' I would like to see governors be tough and opt out of this and exert our 10th Amendment rights and tell President Obama, who does not understand the Constitution -- he even being a constitutional lecturer and supposed scholar in our Constitution, not understanding and probably never reading or absorbing the 10th Amendment to understand that states have rights.

"We are sovereign states that can make up our own minds...Pew! Pew! Pew!"
 
2012-06-29 10:54:07 AM  

pueblonative: Itherohdoublereally: pueblonative: Looks like the wahhhmbulance will be working overtime this weekend.

If the decision had gone the other way I'm sure the libs would take the opportunity to show what it means to ibe good sports.

Either that or pushed for Medicare for all. You see when you have a game plan you're much less likely to throw a temper tantrum.


Actually, I think a lot of Liberals would have been OK with Obamacare being overturned because then they would be able to make a better case for UHC.
 
2012-06-29 10:54:09 AM  

birchman: Come up with something better. Until then, shut the fark up. Go ahead and run this fall on the premise of taking away millions of people's healthcare. I'm sure that will go over really well.



Ironically this plan that passed was the Republican plan to counter the Clinton plan of the early 90's. Now that Democrats embraced it as compromise, Republicans have been re-programmed to hate it.
 
2012-06-29 10:54:12 AM  

cchris_39: 3. Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC. At my house (maybe yours too) a good 90% of primary care visits are to get prescriptions for basic sinus and upper respiratory infections. That alone elminates millions of unnecessary doctor visits.


This is a farking stupid idea. It's a recipe for creating drug resistant strains.
 
2012-06-29 10:55:09 AM  

cchris_39: 3. Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC. At my house (maybe yours too) a good 90% of primary care visits are to get prescriptions for basic sinus and upper respiratory infections. That alone elminates millions of unnecessary doctor visits.

Others feel free to add to the list.


The issue with this is that overuse of antibiotics (which would have to be a standard part of such hypothetical kit) creates an environment for anti-biotic resistant strains to occur. Furthermore, not all strains of 'flu' are vulnerable to the same antibiotics; that is to say, this is unnecessarily medicating those sick people. There's a reason why that shiat ain't OTC.
 
2012-06-29 10:55:11 AM  

Nebulious: cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......


So I guess you must be pretty upset that homeowners get an extra tax break and that emergency rooms must treat the uninsured.



I have no problem with tax incentives that encourage highly desirable social and economic behavior. That would be like objecting to your employer's ability to deduct your salary. We WANT people employed.
 
2012-06-29 10:55:23 AM  

Erix: Infernalist: Erix: Infernalist: Lovely. So, you were a die-hard GOPer until your sister came out of the closet and made the whole 'evil gayz' thing very personal to you.

I take comfort in the fact that if your sister hadn't come out of the closet, you'd still be a GOPer.

Thanks for outing yourself as a cock. I started out as a republican, then a libertarian, and now I usually vote for the democrats. I was raised in a very conservative, Christian household, and it took me a while to grow up enough to develop my own positions. Sometimes it takes something like your sister coming out of the closet to make you re-examine your ideals.
I didn't realize that if you aren't born with a particular ideology you'll never rid yourself of the stink of the other side. This is just as bad as the farking "RINO" screamers in the GOP.

Mad, bro?

Here's the deal, son: If it takes a personal investment for you to challenge your political ideals, THEN YOU'RE A HYPOCRITE. If it takes a sister coming out as gay for you to challenge your homophobia and close-minded hatred of a harmless bunch of people who just WANT TO BE LEFT THE FARK ALONE, then you're an intellectual and political coward.

DICK CHENEY came out in favor of gay rights only after his daughter came out of the closet. Cman has put himself into the same category as Dick farking Cheney.

By the way, congrats on claiming a hold on political sanity by abandoning the GOP and the lol-libertarians.

Seriously? So you need to be born and raised with a particular ideology or you're a hypocrite? That's BS. It's absurd to expect people to have examined every aspect of their political beliefs in complete detail by the time they're 20. My family was conservative and Christian, but extremely reasonable (yes, it's possible), and didn't give me much cause to rebel. It took time and independence to figure out where I actually stood on a number of issues, so I can't expect everyone else to have already gone through that difficult ...


I didn't say that. I 'said' that if it takes a personal investment, if it takes a family member coming out as gay in order for you to challenge your own idiocy, then you're a coward and a hypocrite.

I have NO gay family whatsoever, but when I hit about 15, I looked at the bigotry and homophobia and thought to myself "that is farking retarded. Who are they hurting? Why should I hate them?"

I'm not black or Hispanic, nor do I have any intimately close friends of either nationality, but when I grew old enough to think for myself, I found myself completely uncaring and indifferent toward the idea of hating them due to skin color. Mind you, I was raised in Texas.

No, you don't have to be born a Democrat in order to claim it, but you can expect derision and mockery when you come out and tell people if it wasn't for your gay sister, you'd still be a GOPer.
 
2012-06-29 10:55:44 AM  

Dr Dreidel: 64 comments, and no one's mentioned what the "lie" is.

Is that how Obama danced around calling it a tax during a press conference? When he wasn't under oath (and imagine how hilarious THAT would be - a sworn press conference)?

// also, what's the Doughy Pantload's reaction?
// do we know he hasn't suck-started a shotgun over this ruling?


So, if you're not under 'oath', and you lie, it's not a lie? My wife would LOVE to know about that one.
 
2012-06-29 10:55:53 AM  

NateGrey: cchris_39: Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC

I know Republicans dont like science, but there is something about antibiotics and it being freely available for everyone at anytime.


Yeah, that's a terrible idea. People can fark with their own health if they want, but not with antibiotics.
 
2012-06-29 10:56:03 AM  

starsrift: ...environment for anti-antibiotic resistant strains to occur...


FTFM.
 
2012-06-29 10:56:11 AM  

cchris_39: Nebulious: cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......


So I guess you must be pretty upset that homeowners get an extra tax break and that emergency rooms must treat the uninsured.


I have no problem with tax incentives that encourage highly desirable social and economic behavior. That would be like objecting to your employer's ability to deduct your salary. We WANT people employed.


I would think it is highly desirable to have a healthy society.
 
Displayed 50 of 459 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all


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