Europe Is Baffled by the U.S. Supreme Court

[OutHouse]

You first.

 

[nonlnear]

Yeah, that's where the Constitution is displayed. What's your point?

 

[OutHouse]

Yeah, that's where the Constitution is displayed. What's your point?

i really hope you are not an american, if you are i weep for our education and history classes.

 

[nonlnear]

i really hope you are not an american, if you are i weep for our education and history classes.

I really hope English is not your native language. If it is I weep for your sarcasm detection ability.

Read it again. Slower this time:

"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"

That's my favorite part of the Constitution.

 

[Moonbeam]

Auto insurance is mandated by state law as a condition to exercise the privilege of operating a motor vehicle. Anyone that does not wish to purchase auto insurance can do so by not owning and operating a motor vehicle on public highways. This is the same premise as implied consent for alcohol testing when operating a motor vehicle you agree to by obtaining a drivers license from the state.

So then, we can say that health care is a privilege and if you don't want to buy health care insurance you can't use any form of health care, no? And you get only one time to make the decision that in future is irrevocable.

 

[Moonbeam]

Yeah, that's where the Constitution is displayed. What's your point?

Seems we got not only the hungry and the poor but a bunch of muddled hasses.

 

[BoberFett]

Seems we got not only the hungry and the poor but a bunch of muddled hasses.

Maybe you should learn how to wipe better...

 

[BoberFett]

i really hope you are not an american, if you are i weep for our education and history classes.

Ummm, that's his point. Nowhere is the language you posted enshrined in law. It's engraved on a statue. If there was a statue in Mississippi with some claptrap about the south rising again, does that make it a national aspiration?

 

[Bird222]

Can your government make you carry a firearm or be financially punished?

See second militia act of 1792.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1792

 

[Fern]

As NPR pointed out the broccoli analogy would really only be valid if large parts of the country didn't pay for broccoli but then consumed tens of billions of dollars of broccoli at other people's expense.

The fact that other pay, or do not pay, for it is (apparently) irrelevant.

That aspect is a 'policy reason' to impose a mandate.

If Congress if found to have the power to mandate individuals to purchase HI, then presumably they could mandate another product purchase if they felt it had good policy reasons.

This discussion centers around something referred to as a 'limiting principal'. The limiting principle concept means 'what limits Congress in mandating product purchases?' What stops Congress from mandating broccoli?

The govt lawyers could not describe or identify a limiting principal when asked by SCOTUS judges during the oral arguments.

So, the issue of 'who pays for what' does not appear to have an impact on the central question of Congressional powers. (I say does not "appear to" because the SCOTUS could always 'invent' a limiting principal for Congress, including that of who pays for what, when writing their opinion.)

Fern

 

[cybrsage]

What about auto insurance? Drivers are forced to buy it, for the very same reason as the health insurance mandate.

States are allowed to do it, the fed gov cannot.

I support a state created UHC system but oppose a fed gov one.

 

[cybrsage]

See second militia act of 1792.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1792

It was repealed just a few years later:

Sec. 10. [revised to read:]And be it further enacted, That the act, intitled "Act to provide for calling forth the militia, to execute the laws of Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions," passed the second day of May one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, shall be, and the same is hereby repealed.
APPROVED, February 28, 1795.

http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm

Never made it to court to find it if was constitutional or not.

 

[theeedude]

It was repealed just a few years later:


http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm

Never made it to court to find it if was constitutional or not.

It was signed by that anti-Constitution president George Washington.

 

[cybrsage]

He was not perfect. He made errors like everyone else.

 

[theeedude]

He was not perfect. He made errors like everyone else.

I guess him and that socialist John Adams had no respect for the Founders' intent.

 

[cybrsage]

You act like they all agreed. Did you know Rhode Island refused to sign the Constitution until into the 1790s?

The founders were not the Borg.

 

[theeedude]

You act like they all agreed. Did you know Rhode Island refused to sign the Constitution until into the 1790s?

The founders were not the Borg.

So there is no original intent of the Founders?

 

[cybrsage]

There is, and many times the intents were contradictory. The Constitution was written by committee...and everyone gave in some areas they disagreed upon.

 

[nonlnear]

So there is no original intent of the Founders?

Only if you have a reliable Ouija board.
Even Scalia thinks original intent is moronic.

 

[Moonbeam]

He was not perfect. He made errors like everyone else.

True, but what is even more interesting is that you know where he was right and where he was in error, while at the same time admit to no errors. If I were to weight in on this, I'd say you're full of shit compared to Washington.

 

[Moonbeam]

Only if you have a reliable Ouija board.
Even Scalia thinks original intent is moronic.

I can't believe there must have been as many original intents as there were signers, but claiming to knowing what those intents were would I think be folly. And even if you could, of course, it would only be valuable if we also had the original situation and we do not. Some would doubtless argue you can't step into the same river even once.

 

[cybrsage]

True, but what is even more interesting is that you know where he was right and where he was in error, while at the same time admit to no errors. If I were to weight in on this, I'd say you're full of shit compared to Washington.

Considering I eat food and Washington is long dead, I definately have more poop in me than he does. I reduced its amount earlier today, but since Washington has no poop at all I still have more than him. Of course, you are full of poop compared to Washington as well.

What does that have to do with Washington not being perfect?

The next obvious question is: If you were to weigh in while filled with poop and then weigh in without it (after you are long dead), what would be the difference in weight?

 

[Zebo]

That's cause they don't understand corp shill obama is forcing us to buy a defective product at super high margins. They'd get pissed too if they were forced into our system at twice (it will be more) the price they pay now.

 

[OutHouse]

Ummm, that's his point. Nowhere is the language you posted enshrined in law. It's engraved on a statue. If there was a statue in Mississippi with some claptrap about the south rising again, does that make it a national aspiration?

errr what??? not sure what "language that is law" that i posted you are referring to.

 

[Zebo]

What about auto insurance? Drivers are forced to buy it, for the very same reason as the health insurance mandate.

First of all you can opt out. All state allow self insurance by posting a bond and many small business and large businesses with fleets do understanding insurance is a rip off and builds biggest buildings in town and pays largest salaries. It's suckers game and poor value over the long haul.

You can't with Obamacare. By virtue of being born a US citizen you are forced into this insurance scam.

Second, you also have option like not driving and don't have to buy auto insurance.

One other thing insurance has done is serve as a form of finalization which has skyrocketed HC costs across the board last 30 years. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www/akcs-www?post=195434&ord=2737003 and will just get worse adding more into scam.