1 Site is all F-ed. Something linking to Hulu is infinite looping.

2 I think therefore I... owe the government money.

3 I'm with Coulter on this one: we need a gun mandate.  I'm poor, so several should be provided to me.

4 This latest case was based on religious grounds and was on shaky grounds to begin with. I don't think it carries the weight that the FL case had.

5 I will grant that this idiot appointed by Clinton is seriously brain-dead.

6 Isn't there already, still?, an exemption for Amish Americans?

7 With the repeal of the 18th Amendment the government owes me liquor.

8 According to communist judges there is no limit to congressional power and the written Constitution is meaningless.

I wish that there were recall provisions for federal judges and I am anxiously awaiting the test of the Western State nullification calls.

The real Constitution never gave the final call on interpretation to SCOTUS.

9 Btw, what is the lefts argument in the event that all INS. Companies go out of business in your state?

10 Isn't there already, still?, an exemption for Amish Americans?

Yes, them and Muslims, but it is not really an "exemption". It is written the same as the exemption for SS. You must belong to a community group that provides for the same coverage.

11 "Her flippant approach to the question is nowhere more apparent than when she chastises the plaintiffs (some of whom want to pay for health care out of pocket and some of whom refuse health care for religious reasons) for being "free riders". Okay. Then mandate every "free-riding" American on welfare and food stamps get a job, or else be penalized for not making a "responsible choice".

12 I thought about purchasing some Humbolt County sensimilla but Judge Kessler apparently smoked it all.  Ergo, she owes me a couple of joints.

13 Last I checked there were over 700 waivers granted.  Guess those people have better mindthoughts or somethin'.

14 Somebody tell me why abortion can't be outlawed based on the judge's reasoning. After all, doesn't the government have a compelling state interest to maximize Social Security revenue with as many workers as possible to keep it solvent. Isn't abortion, as an economic decision, able to be regulated.

15 What a fuckwit.

As previous Commerce Clause cases have all involved physical activity, as opposed to mental activity, i.e. decision-making, there is little judicial guidance on whether the latter falls within CongressÂ’s powerÂ…

Ya think maybe there is little judicial guidance because the Commerce Clause doesn't cover that you fucking ignoramus???

Typical libtard rationalizing..

16 These people are really nothing more than unelected liberal legislators - nothing more, nothing less.

17 The Judge breathes, right? Kessler's using a resource, O₂, and spewing out a "pollutant," CO₂, which must be filtered by government subsidized trees. That economic impact only increases with time/population. Her back taxes are going to be astronomical.

18 Btw, what is the lefts argument in the event that all INS. Companies go out of business in your state?

Posted by: General Schadenfreude at February 23, 2011 07:41 AM (bAySe)

Alas, I'm sure we all know what their arguement will be in that case - they'll say that private insurance was never a good idea to begin with and government "insurance" will be much better, and is vitally necessary.  No doubt that is what they're driving at.  They want to crash the private system so the people will surrender takeover power to the federal government.  Personally I'd rather see medicine go back to a private money transaction rather than see the government take it over. 

And as for this judge's crap about uninsured people burdening the emergency rooms, the easy cure for that is to remove the requirement that e-rooms treat people who have nothing to pay with.  Problem solved.  Health care services are not unlimited - and while "rationing" of some kind is necessary, the best kind is free-market rationing.  We can't afford to give every hobo gold plated health care - but being the one to decide that we can't afford to pay $100,000 for surgery to extend said hobo's life a few months is a hard thing.  Making it a personal economic decision for the patient and letting the chips fall where they may is the best approach.  Making people pay for emergency room care - or not get care - would prevent the welfare queens from taking their little tikes in there for every sniffle. 

19 Rich C@16, you're too kind. They're tyrants.

20 And as for this judge's crap about uninsured people burdening the emergency rooms, the easy cure for that is to remove the requirement that e-rooms treat people who have nothing to pay with.

Actually they are not required to treat all cases. What happened was that they were mandated to treat "life threatening" cases. Then lawfare took over and every case became "life threatening.

21
we live in The Age of Absurdity

22 those Americans who have made had responsible choices made for them by their betters.
FIFY

The socialist/communista crowd has been seeding the judiciary for decades.  I am amazed that Judge Vinson hasn't been impeached for actually reading the Constitutions rather than making it up according to the great five year plan.  Pray that the 0 doesn't get another Supreme Court appointment ro we may never recover.

23 BTW, this is the same scrunt that ruled in 2007 that the DOJ could not transfer a GITMO detainee to Tunisia.

24 Actually they are not required to treat all cases. What happened was that they were mandated to treat "life threatening" cases. Then lawfare took over and every case became "life threatening.

Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2011 07:51 AM (M9Ie6)

I see.  So the legal profession strikes again.  If our side ever gets a true majority again, and the presidency, we need to make tort reform a top-5 priority item.  That will go a long way to neuter those who abuse the system. 

If we limited the must-treat requirement to simple, inexpensive, yet vital activity (like setting a broken bone, for example) I would have a lot less issue with it.  I'm sure that our society is rich enough that we can prevent poor people from walking around with ill-knit bones.  But some kind of sensible limitations have to be set. 

25 *self deleted response*

Just more false logic contortions from The Betters.

26 @AnonymousDrivel- that's a given.  Legislators are sworn to expressly serve the constitution too, but they're happy to pave it, just like the people they vote to the courts.  The only difference is with the former, you can do something about it every 2 or 6 years.

27
Rahm Cocksucker Emmanuel to shitheads in Chicago: "You sure do know how to make a person feel at home."

Isn't that cute? I don't know about you but I think Rahm is mocking the rule of law.

28 Ya think maybe there is little judicial guidance because the Commerce Clause doesn't cover that you fucking ignoramus???

Typical libtard rationalizing..


It is a "because it says we can" versus "because it doesn't say we can't" battle.  The latter is the same crap you get from juvenile, self-centered teens bent on wrecking their own life (while insisting they are just trying to live it).

Liberals are adults that never grew up.

29 The split is one of worldview. For many Democrats the federal government's power is nearly unlimited or should be. That has been the foundational premise of almost all "progressive" litigation and a great deal of Democratic legislation, which seeks to impose solutions on backward individuals and states that just won't get with the program. Well duh. Can those two worldviews coexist in one successful political union? Is that Q addressed in a different thread?

30 GITMO should not fall under judicial revue. They should have military tribunaled and hanged all those bastages by now.

31 Pray that the 0 doesn't get another Supreme Court appointment ro we may never recover.

Posted by: Faux Hrothgar fomenting dissent at February 23, 2011 07:54 AM (DCpHZ)

Amen - I do pray that.  Especially since the republicans will let any Leftist whack job take the bench.  Happily lefturds are still mortal.  They don't live forever, and sometimes we are blessed with their premature death.  If all goes well the most recent two additions will not enjoy long life.

32
The Republican governors need to do one more thing: End state pensions for ALL elected officials.

You're either a 'public servant' or a public liability.

33 If we had a real Republican Party every Clinton judge not blocked during appointment would have been impeached during the Bush years.

34 To a liberal, the only relevant parts of the constitution are the commerce and general welfare clauses, and they can pertain to just about everything (as, of course, we know this is what the Framers intended).  Everything else is just filler.

35

Several thoughts, off the top of my head:

1.  Under this, oh I'm feeling generous so let's call it reasoning, there is no reason why the government cannot force me to have a child.  None.  After all, future generations are needed to finance Social Security, Medicare, et al and I am free riding on those programs if I do not reproduce.  How's it go, one for the mother, one for the father, one for the state?

2.  Doesn't the comment about free health care gut the argument that most bankruptcies are due to health care costs?  After all, if it's free, then there's no bill so there must be no reason to go bankrupt, right?

3.  How is it so terribly awful for American citizens to rely on the kindness of strangers for payment of health care but it's racist eleventy to object to illegal immigrants using the emergency room to do exactly the same?

4.  The conflation of health insurance and health care drives me utterly batshit.  Imma have to go Venn on their asses.

5.  Where is the acknowledgement that this mandate will be enforced at the point of a gun?  There's no choice involved when I'll be shot for not complying.  No, that's not an exaggeration.  Laws are enforced with, well, force.  Defy the law long enough and those with weapons will come for you.

When are we going Moron Amish?  Because sign me up for that.

36 Yeah.. We gots to get us some Amishness.  I'm pretty sure one could make a pretty good buck setting up a website to register the newly converted Amish and providing a genuine certificate of being Amish.

37 The only thing I can take solace in is the fact the opinions in favor of Obamacare are so shoddy that I have to think that even a squish like Kennedy will get it right.  If he has the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing with Citizens United, there's no reason he can't do it again with Obamacare.  Unlike this kook, Scalia is going to make him answer the logical question that if the mandate is Constitutional, what economic inactivity would not covered under the Commerce Clause and for what differing reasons from this case.

38 Do amer-indians get the waiver? It is a Federal crime to ask an amer-indian to provide proof he is an amer-indian.

39 I was FORCED to go to the Emergency Room for stitches and paid $1850 for the hospital and $450 for the physician. Insurance companies pay the hospital $450 and the physician $165. So it's people like me making up for the insurance companies who made a profit off the same deal.

40 This same reasoning would allow the government to declare any boycott an illegal act. Think about that for a second.

41
This same reasoning would allow the government to declare any boycott an illegal act.


Well.....if it's for the right cause there will be an exemption.

42 I was FORCED to go to the Emergency Room for stitches...

Some years ago I saw Army surplus field surgical kits for about $60 in a Army/Navy store.  The bag had everything you'd need to do some pretty major surgery.

43

I'm not impressed with Judge Kessler's intellect or her emotionalist reasoning.

Re-read what she wrote.  It's horrible and childish.

44 Awesome analysis, Gabe. Now please explain why these types of judges shouldn't be hung from lampposts with their own robes.

45

Affirmative action is the left's maneuver to divide everyone into victim groups based on ethnicity and skin color. It's the left's favorite pastime.  Saying Obamacare is like affirmative action is just dumb.  Obamacare forces people to pay a fine to the government if they refuse to participate.  KING!

46 More emphasis needs to be placed on the difference between health insurance and health care.  This is not about health care but how people are allowed to pay or it.  Even for someone like me who is not rich, it's cheaper to pay out of pocket than it is to pay for health insurance.  I kept it in case I get into an accident that doesn't kill me. But even now that won't save me from catastrophic medical bills because I lost 100% hospitalization years ago when the bleeding hearts dictated hospital stays.  Laws were passed telling insurance companies how many days they had to pay for, so of course no more 100% hospitalization.  So now I pay through the nose for insurance and will still get a huge bill if I ever get into an accident.

I want the right, or I want to keep the right, to decide how I pay for it.  At this stage of my life now I'm better off to keep the money I pay for health insurance and if I ever do rack up a large bill then it will be paid for out of my estate.  The truth is that anyone who has the money these days to afford health insurance will have to pay for it because they, duh, have money.  It's only those who can't afford health insurance who get "free" care and that's nothing new and that doesn't change with this law.

47 42 That is a very good argument! Hadn't thought of that angle.

48

Judge Kessler is a sad reminder that the leftwing mindset should never be given a robe an any authority.  Liberty kill and stupidity ensue.

49 To put it less analytically, and less charitably, those who choose--and Plaintiffs have made such a deliberate choice--not to purchase health insurance will benefit greatly when they become ill, as they surely will, from the free health care which must be provided by emergency rooms and hospitals to the sick and dying who show up on their doorstep.

So, when is this judge going to order the federal government to enforce its laws concerning illegal immigration, as this describes exactly what illegals do. 

50

Is anyone out there in AceLand even getting remotely scared this s*** might actually remain the law of the land? Seriously, what do we do?

If the other czarist initiatives gain enough traction, we will then be bounded on all sides and, to even exist in America, one will need to adhere to the mandates. I am all for off the grid etc but it just won't work for the 99% of us who are raising kids/make a living/pay the mortgage.

Do you think they might just actually succeed?

51

She's also applying her own faulty logic instead of... wait for it.... THE LAW.

dumb dumb dumb

52 PA@44 Army surplus field surgical kits for about $60

How much does it cost to buy proficiency in using the kit? If it's less than $100, count me in.

53 I think it would be hilarious if a mom and pop INS. Company changed the legal name of their company to "none" as a way to protest.

54

"That's not a legal argument. It's a policy one."

 

55 The 15 to 16 piece kit can be had for $30.

56

Well, initial reaction is, if this is the best they've got, then Ocare isn't long for the world. However, I suspect they (the socialists) can do better at constructing an argument that would win the highly conditioned and nuanced support of A Kennedy.

The more important question is, what do we do about the Judge Kesslers? She isn't some lone nut, you know? the judiciary is full of such people, 52%ers in robes.

57 Posted by: AvocationAviator at February 23, 2011 08:27 AM (3iMgs)

At some point, they've crossed a bridge too far.  Is HCR it?  I don't know, but it's certainly getting there. 

At this point, the filters between my brain and fingers and between my brain and mouth are getting over-loaded... I may need to switch them out before something I'll regret saying/typing gets out...

Hello- Congressional Republicans?  Maybe it's time for a "Sense of the House" resolution to help the Supremes make up their minds?  Hello Circuits, maybe its time you sped this up?

That last one is even more important- whatever way it goes, the undecided nature of this question cannot be good for business forecasting.

58 There is no legal remedy for judicial terrorism.

59 Of course, if Judge Kessler is correct, then every "mental activity" that has an economic effect is subject to regulation by the federal government. This would indeed justify a mandate to buy broccoli or GM cars or whatever because your decision not to make such purchases is "economic activity" that affects the price of these goods in the interstate marketplace.

Which is the end-game for liberals - to have every single damn activity, even respiration, that we do require the blessing of the feds. 

60 This entire country is a lost cause and is spiraling into the abyss.

61 Posted by: chuckR at February 23, 2011 08:29 AM (UGxsK)

Depends.  In the new system, it's just a Feat: Skill Training: Army Surplus Medical Kit.

Oh.  Wait.  You meant in real life...

I suspect they (the socialists) can do better at constructing an argument that would win the highly conditioned and nuanced support of A Kennedy.

I suspect they can't.  If they could, they would have by now.  The Supremes are going to look at all of these cases when they make their judgment, and weak-tea crap like these decisions won't look good.  I think they're counting on the "The Kennedy Vote" to go their way.  I wish I were sure they were wrong...

62 How much does it cost to buy proficiency in using the kit?

About $20 for a Army Ranger's field medical manual.

63 So, basically, Republican appointed judges continue to view the Constitution as a document which expressly limits Federal power, and Democrat appointed judges continue to view the Constitution as a blank document to which they can ascribe whatever view is most politically convenient.

64 Posted by: rplat at February 23, 2011 08:36 AM (4vq8i)

I don't believe that.  I just believe we've sunk back into an aristocratic form of government, and we need to stop it and reverse it.  Thus my idea yesterday to create a list of all the "bridge too far" moments of current elected officials to help insurgent citizen-legislator candidates get elected to Congress.

Hopefully to the Presidency as well, at some point, but let's start by giving the legislature back to the people instead of to the Unions, Corporations, and Special Interests (Special Interest defined as: Ideologically based group that can afford to purchase their very own Senator).

65 Shithead Judges, I hate you.

66 All you Lefties ... if you even think about lighting up a joint, go to Pay.gov

67 63 This entire country is a lost cause and is spiraling into the abyss.

This is the same feeling we had in 1979, then Reagan won...
But we really are hanging by a thread - which side of the bed will Anthony Kennedy get out of, how squishy with the Congressional Republicans get, can Obama fool the electorate again next year... It is scary.

68 I thought law students who got A's became law professors, B's became judges, C's lawyers, and D's politicians -- why do so many B students want to act like D students?

69 These judges make King George seem benevolent.

70 Becoming a judge depends more on who you know and how much you can afford to pay than it does intelligence and ability.

71

Judge: "...those who choose--and Plaintiffs have made such a deliberate choice--not to purchase health insurance will benefit greatly when they become ill, as they surely will, from the free health care which must be provided by emergency rooms and hospitals to the sick and dying who show up on their doorstep."

Rational person: Okay, maybe the government should stop forcing all health care centers to provide services to anyone who comes through the door. The old charity hospitals were fulfilling a purpose before the government started meddling.

If the government can regulate all decisions that might have economic effects, then they can assign people to whatever profession would be deemed by those in power to maximize economic efficiency. So the next Republican president can assign this judge to cleaning public restrooms and then let's hear her legal reasoning as to how her constitutional rights have been violated.

72 I suspect it was her experience as a "family judge" that gave her the insight for this tour de minor.

73 Rush made the "food insurance" analogy a long time ago.  You need food more than you need healthcare.  Why isn't there a mandatory food insurance policy being offered to everyone?  You have to buy certain kinds of food, and maintain your coverage for life.  If you can't afford it, then the government will help you buy it.

KFC, Krispy Kreme, Burger King hardest hit.

74 Seriously, what do we do?

Take a page out of the Alinsky playbook - overwhelm the system.  Get your debts paid down, downsize your housing requirements, embrace the underground cash/barter economy, hunker down and minimize your visible financial footprint to the point where you qualify for the free Federally subsidized healthcare.

75

ObamaCare is still very unpopular and will remain so.  Sure, certain emotional aspects strike a positive, like "coverage for pre-existing conditions".. fine... but the bulk of the thing is unpopular. People understand it's too expensive, restrictive, it will force employers to drop their coverage and force people into the government plan. It's also 2000+ pages of new IRS tax code/tax increases. Single payer is next and this nation is 70/30 split against single payer. Shit - I know lefty dems who are against single payer.

76 How many cocks did she suck to get this judgeship? She sure didn't get it based on her intellectualism or understanding of the Constitution.

77 When did commerce get redefined as any economic activity?

78 Posted by: Purple Avenger at February 23, 2011 08:53 AM (r3BbG)

No more Valu-Rite deliveries? NOOOOOO!

79 80 When did commerce get redefined as any economic activity?

Forget that - it's now defined as no activity whatsoever!

80 I think that we should start asking judges to recuse themselves on the basis of numbers or categories of reversals by higher courts, as their predictable legally erroneous behavior constitutes an illegal tax on the resources of those who bring cases before them.

81 Up next, Judge Kessler to rule on whether non hunters and non fishermen must purchase annual licenses and duck stamps.

82 Actually the commerce clause is modified by the tenth amendment. The judges simply fail to understand that amendments change what the constitution says. The commerce clause says: "[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes. The tenth amendment says:"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Expanding the commerce clause as liberals have expanded it is expressly forbidden by the tenth amendment. If the tenth amendment didn't exist then the commerce clause - as well as any other clause of the Constitution could be expanded without limit. However the tenth amendment expressly forbids such expansion; if the power is not delegated to the United States by the Constitution the federal government is forbidden to seize that power.

If a liberal argues that the commerce clause is not limited by the tenth amendment then the question arises: does congress have the power to mandate that French citizens living only in France (etc.) be required to purchase U.S. private health care under the Commerce with foreign Nations section? All of the arguments that can be used under the and among the several States clause can certainly be used for the Commerce with foreign Nations clause.

Please note that the commerce clause only allows the Federal government to regulate commerce among the States - it does not allow the Federal government to regulate private transactions of individuals or companies. In other words; only if one state buys something from another state (since that would be commerce among the states) would the Federal government have the authority to regulate that transaction. If the founders had meant for the Federal Government to be able to regulate commerce among the people or among companies it would have included them in its expressed powers. The tenth amendment expressly prohibits the Federal government from regulating private transactions since the commerce clause can't be expanded to include them. (See, I can argue just like a some nit-picking asshole lawyer too).

83

We need to get as many states as possibie to pass laws and make statements, like Virginia did, that the individual mandate is unconstitutional and that they will not pay for the new Medicaid expansion foisted on them by Obamacare.  If we can get 2/3 of the states to pass such laws I think the states arguing the main case to SCOTUS can argue that a majority of Americans oppose this law as passed, and so a slim one-vote majority vote in a Congress that was soundly defeated in 2010 largely over this legislation should carry very little weight.  Particularly since many of those votes were cast with little knowledge of what was actually in the bill.  Scalia is going to want some good reasons to overturn an act of Congress.  We need to give him some.  Change the facts on the ground before this case gets to SCOTUS.  This is an illegitimate, unconstitutional, unpopular act that was effectively repealed by the people in 2010, was repealed in fact already by the House of Representatives, and can be shown to be even more unpopular once the states get in the act this year.

Failing that, we need to work like hell to elect a Republican Senate and President in 2012 who will repeal the whole damn thing. 

84 But some kind of sensible limitations have to be set. 

Posted by: Reactionary at February 23, 2011 07:55 AM (xUM1Q)

Sounds like a death panel to me?

85

Later today, Judge Kessler is expected to issue a ruling on whether the decision to drive to your destination of 100 miles or more away, rather than fly or take high speed rail, can be regulated under the Commerce Clause.

An as-yet unreleased draft of her opinion states, in part, "It is pure semantics to argue that an individual who makes a choice to forgo health insurance the many pleasures of a TSA groping is not “acting,” especially given the serious economic and health-related consequences to every individual of that choice. Making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something."

86 someone somewhere summed this up very nicely by asking when did the courts become so partisan?

87 Not wanting to buy health insurance = thoughtcrimve = double-plus ungood.

88

I'm not impressed with Judge Kessler's intellect or her emotionalist reasoning. Re-read what she wrote.  It's horrible and childish.Posted by: Lemon Kitten

I would go re read it but then I'd have to kill myself. I haven't looked but it this seems like the writing of an affirmative action pretender.

 

89 All your choices are mine bitchez!.

90 You will only pick red on the roulette wheel bitchez!.

91 No 9 irons on the fairway bitchez!

92 The tyrants will not back down unless made to.

93 No whining in the FEMA camps bitchez!

94 If we can get 2/3 of the states to pass such laws I think the states arguing the main case to SCOTUS can argue that a majority of Americans oppose this law as passed, and so a slim one-vote majority vote in a Congress that was soundly defeated in 2010 largely over this legislation should carry very little weight.

If we could get 2/3 of the States to pass that we could probably7 hold an Article V convention and fix the SCOTUS meddling all together.

95 Why did the plaintiffs bring suit in a court that was reliably liberal?  This seems a *facepalm* moment in the history of judge-shopping.

96 Vic...I think you need 3/4 of the states...sorry.

97

 This would indeed justify a mandate to buy broccoli

All part of our plan, all part of our plan. The new world order is...green.

98

The left would love to install some sort of mind-crime charges against anyone who dare question them. 

Kansas-- I change my mind.  Don't re-read it!  It's not even a legal argument anyway.

 

99 And then the judge added 'It has electrolytes.'

100 The plaintiffs should always have one attorney they could sacrifice. Someone who is either retiring or has decided not to practice law any longer. They can use him to address the judge after a decision like this. He could direct a simple question to the judge like where did you get your law degree, K-Mart?

101 88 Later today, Judge Kessler is expected to issue a ruling on whether the decision to drive to your destination of 100 miles or more away, rather than fly or take high speed rail, can be regulated under the Commerce Clause.
-------
Remember when Clinton was toying with taxing "imputed income"? The argument then was that if you buy a house because it's cheaper than renting, the difference between the house payment and rent should be counted as income and taxed.

102 The actions of the Dem legislators in WI, IN, Ohio and elsewhere and this kind of bizarre legal decision prove that liberal don't want to play by any set of rules, they just want to make shit up to suit their goals. We are rapidly approaching a state of anarchy.

103 Vic...I think you need 3/4 of the states...sorry.

I know that, if you can get 2/3 you can get 3/4.

104 Law is too important to be left up to Judges.

105

And then the judge added 'It has electrolytes.'

heh.

106 We are rapidly approaching a state of anarchy.

I would change that slightly and say we are approaching Manarchy.

A system where there are no "set" rules but there are a set of rulers.

107 and hanged all those bastages by now.

I'm one of those moderate squishes who thinks that just joining Al-Queda isn't a capital offense.  Lock em up and throw away the cell.  Then send their XXL orange jumpsuit to Rura Penthe.

108 Of course you know that the judge just single handedly solve the present, and any future, mortgage crisis.  All congress needs to do now is pass a law requiring ownership of a house and payment of a mortgage.  No longer will we have to put up with freeloading rent payers and deadbeat home owners.  There will be no foreclosures because paying will be mandated!  Can't pay?  Tough fucking shit, Sherlock.  It's the mutha fuckng law!

109 This just points to how radical a document is the Constitution.  The English system of government, from which we draw much inspiration, does hold the Parliament to hold absolute sovereignty, i.e. Parliament can make just about anything into law.  (and 98% of you already know this, but the trolls and such...)

We on the other hand, specifically limit the Federal government's powers with restrictions like....the commerce clause.

Forget the legal precedents or the jurisprudence.  Read a little history, you stupid roundhead judge. 

110 "She was nominated to the court by President Bill Clinton, and confirmed in July 1994."
"After receiving her B.A. from Cornell University and LL.B. from Harvard Law School, she was hired by the National Labor Relations Board."
"She worked as a legislative assistant to U.S. Senator Harrison A. WilliamsD–NJ), later convicted in the Abscam scandal,"

111

When are we going Moron Amish?  Because sign me up for that.

Posted by: alexthechick at February 23, 2011 08:02 AM (VtjlW)

Stompy boots are hochmut.

112 Remember when Clinton was toying with taxing "imputed income"? The argument then was that if you buy a house because it's cheaper than renting, the difference between the house payment and rent should be counted as income and taxed.

Posted by: Anachronda at February 23, 2011 09:21 AM (6fER6)

It is a short step to eliminating the middleman and just having your entire salary sent directly to the government (where 16000 new IRS agents are awaiting your check), and let the IRS refund what you actually need (based on the soon to be published list of unearned income tax credits).  This solves a lot of problems for our politician masters!

113 If you like your euthanasia, you can keep your euthanasia. If not, commerce clause, bitches!

114 "The detainee's lawyer said, "The executive has now been told it cannot bury its Guantanamo mistakes in Third World prisons." He also stated that, "This is the first time the judicial branch has exercised its inherent power to control the excesses of the executive as to treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay."

115 71 I thought law students who got A's became law professors, B's became judges, C's lawyers, and D's politicians -- why do so many B students want to act like D students?

Posted by: Jean at February 23, 2011 08:43 AM (WkuV6)

Who the hell gets a C or (God forbid) a D in law school?

Do they even have those?  Hell, Yale doesn't have grades at all.  They hand you your diploma before you start classes.

And who the hell flunks out of law school?  Besides Algore?

116 Remember when Clinton was toying with taxing "imputed income"? The argument then was that if you buy a house because it's cheaper than renting, the difference between the house payment and rent should be counted as income and taxed.

Posted by: Anachronda at February 23, 2011 09:21 AM (6fER6)

Now I do.  Remember when Hillary had her law firm accelerate her bonus payment, customarily made in the first quarter following the close of the year, so that she received it in 1992?  Then in 1993, her husband signed into law the first ever retroactive tax rate increase.  Never before (or since IIRC) had a tax rate change passed in mid-year been made retroactive to Jan 1 of that year.

Slick, they were.

117

Slick, they were.

Posted by: Count de Monet at February 23, 2011 09:31 AM (XBM1t)

"Slick they were" "slick they are"

118 It has what plants crave!!

119 The executive has now been told it cannot bury its Guantanamo mistakes in Third World prisons.

If that's a problem, shallow graves work for me too.

120

121 With the logic of this decision, it means the government also has the power to tell us how much salt to eat and to ban saturated fats. There is no end to what government can do to us.

122 Forget the legal precedents or the jurisprudence.  Read a little history, you stupid roundhead judge. 

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at February 23, 2011 09:27 AM (0IPsJ)

Don't forget about the Scottish law...lots of precedents there.

123 It seems you moderns are on the verge of failing at the "if you can keep it" part of the equation.

124 I wonder what the tax would be on what I'm thinking about Judge Kessler right now.

125 As PoliPundit notes, this same "logic" should be applied to abortion--good for the goose, good for the gander:

"1. Abortion affects interstate commerce.

After all, if those kids were born, hospitals would need to provide health care to them and their mothers before, during, and after the delivery!

Not to mention the healthcare needs of those kids after theyÂ’re born, and when they grow up.

And we all know that healthcare is interstate commerceÂ…

2. Since abortion affects interstate commerce, Congress may regulate it!

Thus Congress may require that women wait for one year before getting an abortion.

Even if this argument were struck down, Congress could do the following:

1. Impose a $5,000 tax on each abortion.

2. This is a “tax,” not a “penalty,” or a “mandate,” and is thus well within Congress’s taxing powers.

After all, Congress taxes medical equipment, plastic surgery, and tanning salons as part of ObamacareÂ… Why not abortion?

UPDATE: The Abortion Tax bill could probably pass the House quite easily, given that there are about 240 Republicans. And the Senate could pass it with just 51 votes under budget reconciliation, since it raises taxes (thatÂ’s how the Clinton tax hikes were passed by a bare majority of senators.)"

http://polipundit.com/?p=29145

126 The next thing coming will be a regulation of our sexual activity.

127

You know how to end this crap with judges?  Simple.

Institute a single-payer system...for lawyers.

There is no reason not to. How can we have true universal access to the courts if some lawyers are more expensive than others? Everything lawyers say about themselves points to the notion that we should have some sort of universal legal insurance. That way, everybody's on a level playing field.

Now, that means that lawyers' salaries can be regulated and since there really is no such thing as private practice (the legal profession is dependent on the rules and nature of the court system and it isn't a voluntary exchange of goods and services) this is a perfectly acceptable solution in a capitalist society.

Moreover, law professors' and judges' salaries will fall into line. 

Now I know Kessler's compensation cannot be reduced, constitutionally, but there is no reason we have to provide her with chambers, electricity, heat, air conditioning and all that free parking I know that she has.

128 Come here for some of my tasty, warm knowledge bombs. The burning is only temporary! http://moisturepoints.blogspot.com/

129

The dismal and bloody history of human subjugation is once again doomed to repeat itself

But, but, but this time we'll be in charge.

And we'll have enlightened despots.  I'm sure nobody thought of that before.

130 There is no end to what government can do to us.

Well... duh!

131 Fuck the mandatory health insurance premiums. How much will the Feds be charging me every time I think about the Bunga Bunga?

132 I mean dear God she's from the family court, the no holds barred, family court and she's worked for the NYC Board of Ed

Dear God her pedigree is all left all the time.

133 With the logic of this decision, it means the government also has the power to tell us how much salt to eat and to ban saturated fats. There is no end to what government can do to us.

Posted by: JM at February 23, 2011 09:37 AM (yAeKG)

Single men, who choose not to buy drinks for unattractive female bar patrons, hit hard.

OTOH, last call fallen angels who refuse my offer of pancakes have a direct and measurable impact on the commercial sex industry.  Commerce Clause win for FUBO men!

134 We are rapidly approaching a state of anarchy.

You may have the wrong end of the spectrum...anarchists aren't real big on the government telling them how to live.

135 Dear God her pedigree is all left all the time.

Posted by: stevie at February 23, 2011 09:46 AM (p302b)

Appointed in 1994.  Clinton didn't nominate these idiots after the '94 elections.

136 You may have the wrong end of the spectrum...anarchists aren't real big on the government telling them how to live.

Posted by: HeatherRadish at February 23, 2011 09:48 AM (nAOMZ)

Yeah...anarchists are anarchy fetishists when it's safe to be so.  When the shit hits the fan, they'll be cowered in Mom's basement.

137 Isn't there already, still?, an exemption for Amish Americans?

I think you are confusing the Amish with Unions!  hee hee

138

To put it less analytically, and less charitably, those who choose--and Plaintiffs have made such a deliberate choice--not to purchase health insurance will benefit greatly when they become ill, as they surely will, from the free health care which must be provided by emergency rooms and hospitals to the sick and dying who show up on their doorstep.

I think I have found the root of the problem with healthcare.  The answer to the problem is to collect payment upfront, and turn away anyone who can't pay.

139

You know how to end this crap with judges?  Simple.

Institute a single-payer system...for lawyers.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 23, 2011 09:42 AM (BvBKY)

I think this idea has a lot to recommend it.  If any of the professions should be nationalized, I think the legal profession is the most logical one.  As AmishDude explained, it deals with a purely governmental issue.  It relies on government functions to exist. 

The best part would be the fairly strong disincentive it would provide for people thinking about going into law.  Fewer lawyers = good thing.  Plus the costs would be dramatically reduced - no more sharing of tort proceeds, which would eliminate the motivation to grub for maximum awards.  Plus rich criminals would have a harder time buying their way out of trouble.

140
I'm still waiting for one of the geniuses to explain to me how the Commerce Clauses is apropos to something that can not be purchased across state lines.

141 By the way, at liberal law firms, are the paralegals unionized?

142

The best part would be the fairly strong disincentive it would provide for people thinking about going into law. 

By the way, that's not just me saying that.  Justice Scalia says so also.

143 146
I'm still waiting for one of the geniuses to explain to me how the Commerce Clauses is apropos to something that can not be purchased across state lines.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at February 23, 2011 09:52 AM (1hM1d)

Thread winnah.

144 Time for pitch forks & torches on the steps of the capital & supreme court for cryin out loud.

145 "It's time to get bloody!!!11!!"

146

I think I have found the root of the problem with healthcare.  The answer to the problem is to collect payment upfront, and turn away anyone who can't pay.

That's like, fascist, mannnnnnnnnnnnn!

147

Thinking a little outside the box here, doesn't Obamacare violate the 13th amendment?

Isn't this "involuntary servitude"?

148

Boy, how far we have fallen from the early days of American freedom.

Now our government can dictate that we must purchase an insurance product that has been designed by the government.  We must pay whatever rate the government sets.  Worst of all, the government will decide when we can no longer avail ourselves of that product they forced us to buy, and government "death panels" will determine when we will be cut off from health care.

And democrats wonder why people across America are p*ssed off.

149 148

The best part would be the fairly strong disincentive it would provide for people thinking about going into law. 

By the way, that's not just me saying that.  Justice Scalia says so also

 

In all the political/quasi-legal discussions I've had, I don't think I've ever heard that idea. Sounds great to me. I'll have to go bounce it off some of the law-knobs at Althouse or somewhere like that. I can already hear their cries of horror. It'll probably be the first and last time they all agree on anything.

150 OT: You can send some love to the SEIU... http://action.seiu.org/page/s/wisconsin

151

The argument that everyone at some time must consume health care is a false argument, at least how it applies to Obamacare.

1. People die in accidents, of heart attacks, in war, murdered and other causes everyday without consume Health Care that they could not pay for themselves.

2. Young people under this bill rarely consume Health Care.

3. People go through there whole lives healthy and don't consume health care until they are on Medicare which is not part of this bill.

That argument is very weak.

152 so wait, if i go to the emergency room for an illness this judge thinks I can't pay cash or setup a payment plan like thousands of other people do?

153

28 Isn't that cute? I don't know about you but I think Rahm is mocking the rule of law.

Interesting thing about Rahm's win as mayor of Chicago......there were some legal challenges to Rahm's candidacy.  Specifically, even though Rahm owned property in Chicago, he had rented it out to a tenant (who refused to move out when Rahm wanted to move back in a couple of months ago).

So technically Rahm did NOT live in Chicago for the year prior to the election, he owned property & paid property taxes but he did NOT live in Chicago.

There is a requirement that city workers live in Chicago (anybody who draws a paycheck from the city or its schools, parks, police force, firefighters, etc.)  You can be fired for not living in the city.  Speculation is that Rahm's win will unleash legal challenges to the requirement to live in the city.  If the city loses its city workers to the suburbs, the city loses its middle class.  It really will become a city of welfare hobos and the uber rich. 

154 Jimmy Carter should be arrested for having lust in his heart

155 District Judge: The Federal Government Can Regulate Your Mindthoughts


Now ... let's not get crazy.  Gladys The Brain doesn't want to let the government regulate your mindthoughts. She just thinks that the federal government has the right to tax and penalize (or any combination, thereof) your mindthoughts. You can still have your own mindthoughts, you just have to pay Uncle Sam for the luxury.

I know what you're thinking ... and that will cost you $100.

Of course, lawyers are lucky in this context, since they don't think, at all.

156 For the Dems it's all about naked power grabs. Legal? Illegal?  I'm the guy with the courts.

157 It forces them to charge the uninsured at rates double and triple what they pay. If that isn't anti-trust, I don't know what is.

Inaccurate.  Doctors inflate their prices to get more money from Insurance Providers to make up for the self-pays who don't.  Pay, that is.  Insurance agreements basically say that they will "approve" (which is not necessarily "pay") an amount based on the "Usual and Customary" rate.  That is, they take all the doctors in a given geographic location, calculate the rough average of what they charge for a given procedure, and then approve an amount slightly less than that (at BCBS while I was there, most agreements were for 15% less that U&C).  So, to make more money, Doctors hike their rates.  There is no "forcing" beyond the standard market force of "I want more money."  (Note: nothing wrong with "I want more money," and its often quite justified, but let's be clear that there is no form of coercion involved, here.)

However, if they were to charge less to the uninsured, they would reduce that U&C rate, and get lower reimbursements.  Which is, indeed, a kind of broken system.

In reality, most Doctors will (if you have a family doctor, and you're up-front with him/her) "charge" you one rate, but then write-off the difference between that and what they actually want you to pay.  This is gaming the system so much it borders on (but does not quite cross the line to) fraud, but that's the way the system works, and just about every doctor does it.  Note this applies to a regularly seen, family physician (or even a specialist who you see frequently), and does not apply to "big-box" doctors, or those Urgent Care clinics.  They have absolutely no problem screwing everybody over.

The answer to this is to go back to only Major Medical insurance plans, but I suspect that particular ship sailed quite some time ago.  It might be off the coast of Somali and boarded by pirates by now...

158

 Speculation is that Rahm's win will unleash legal challenges to the requirement to live in the city.  If the city loses its city workers to the suburbs, the city loses its middle class.  It really will become a city of welfare hobos and the uber rich. 

He had to kill the city to win the city.

159 Mass Dem Congressman tells union goons time to get bloody.
"Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary."

Really?  You _really_ want to have a violent confrontation with Red America?

160 Riot police and photographer on fire after petrol bombs thrown in Athens.

Recycled fryer oil has too high an ignition point to be used in molotov cocktails, so Madison is probably safe from this sort of thing.

161 Really?  You _really_ want to have a violent confrontation with Red America?

Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at February 23, 2011 10:17 AM (gQF+b)

This is nothing new.  Unions have always been the original terrorists.  They have long been accustomed to using violence in order to further their goals and have almost never been punished for such, either on the individual level or in terms of the conspiracy to commit violence from the highest levels.  Given that we have an America-hating Indonesian Imbecile running the Executive (with his equally retarded lackey running Justice) the odds of union thugs being held culpable for violence they commit hovers around 0. In fact, it's in the negatives, as the victims of union thuggery are more likely to be prosecuted than the union thugs.

Let the biting off of fingers commence!

162 And you will buy a government motors suicide clown car.

Ah yes, read the Declaration of Independence, slowly ... while you still can.

163 Nominee: Gladys Kessler , of the District of Columbia, to be United States District Judge for the District of Columbia

Floor Action: June 15, 1994 - Confirmed by the Senate by Voice Vote.




As always, sterling work in vetting Presidential nominees, Senate Republicans.

Hope your rubber stamp never runs out of ink.

164 There should be a special tax for judges, because they made an active decision to become one.  We could call it a fee if they like.

165 Dr. Heinz Doofensmirt - IT CAN. A supreme irony of Ocare is the undermining of rights to privacy in medical treaments, etc. How proponents do not get this I do not understand.

166 They seem to be drawing on "medical treatment is inevitable."  But what about Christian Scientists? 

167 In reality, most Doctors will (if you have a family doctor, and you're up-front with him/her) "charge" you one rate, but then write-off the difference between that and what they actually want you to pay.  This is gaming the system so much it borders on (but does not quite cross the line to) fraud, but that's the way the system works, and just about every doctor does it.

In my experience, dentists are really guilty of doing this. 

168 As for the notion that this does stand: That's where you have to decide just what this country and it's freedoms are worth to you.

"Give me Liberty or Give me Death" isn't and wasn't an empty phrase. If you want liberty, you are going to have to prepare for the possibility that your blood is the one to water the tree. When Patrick Henry uttered that phrase, there was a very real and material likelihood he would be killed.

Today, the leftist/socialist establishment has spent millions of hours and billions of dollars on indoctrinating the masses with the notion that it is better to live on you knees in chains than die on your feet a free man. They have created handouts in every facet of life, dependent upon the kindness of the government, the form of public schools, welfare, grants, etc. to keep men on their knees, begging for sustenance. Then, with the whip of regulations that cover every aspect of your life--from the food you eat to the bed you sleep on to the vehicle you drive--they remind you who is really in charge, to whom you really owe your allegiance.
The most heavily subsidized is the intellectual class--poor and stupid do not revolt. The revolutions of the past came from the ideas of the intellectuals. Ours is the only one that succeeded because many of our intellectuals were self-taught men who came from the common class long-steeped in the notions of free men. Today, the educated do not churn out publications on the inherit freedoms of man, the genius of the free market or the dignity of self-government: Rather they puppets propagandize on cue--papers and facts and studies on cue to support the ruling class. 

Give me Liberty, or Give me Death.

Today, just how close are we to the same likelihood again?

169 For the Dems it's all about naked power grabs. Legal? Illegal?  I'm the guy with the courts.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at February 23, 2011 10:12 AM (081kp)

Have they no decency, no shame?  At long last, have they no decency?  Put on a toga or mumuu, at least.

170 Dr. Heinz Doofensmirt - IT CAN. A supreme irony of Ocare is the undermining of rights to privacy in medical treaments, etc.

How proponents do not get this I do not understand.

Posted by: SarahW at February 23, 2011 10:27 AM (Z4T49)

The proponents get it.  Don't you remember that amazingly creepy ad for ObamaCare that had the patient seeing his doctor on a stage, with all the doctors in the audience screaming out past test results and medical history (to the surprise of the patient and the utter disgust of just about everyone who saw that commercial)?

ObamaCare proponents are America-haters who take the view of government that the rest of the world (outside of the US) hold; that the the government essentially owns the nation and everything in it (an artifact of the royals who owned and ran all nations before the US was constructed) and that this all-powerful government only allows individuals to feel as if they own things ... while it is convenient to the government.  ObamaCare proponents hate America and our idea that the government doesn't own our nation and isn't allowed to direct anything it wants.  They want the government to be in full control of everything, and that includes all private information.

171

I made the choice to have a cup of coffee this morning.  At some point in the future a judge could decide that that's an "irresponsible" choice.  I'm not looking forward to that day.

It's not the slippery slope that kills you.  It's the sudden stop at the bottom.

172 166 Mass Dem Congressman tells union goons time to get bloody.
"Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary."

Gee, it's almost as if this whole "civility" thing is a scam to shut up the Right.

As if it needs to be pointed out, this is a Congressman, not some schlub commenter on a blog.

173 SIC SEMPTER TYRANUS OBAMASES SEWER SNAKE

174 The American People are divided into three groups. Group 1 sees EbolaCare and says, "Woo Hoo!" Group 2 sees EbolaCare and says, "Matt Damon!" Group 3 sees EbolaCare and says, "WTF?! NO!" This situation can not endure. This Nation will and must physically divide.

175 You can have any color Model T you would like. As long as it is black.

176

It's not the slippery slope that kills you.  It's the sudden stop at the bottom.

Posted by: rockhead at February 23, 2011 10:41 AM (RykTt)

I'm a smoker.  It's being forced down a terribly jagged slope, and all the rights and priveleges that are arbitrarily done away with along the way, that really hurts.  By time we hit the bottom, we're nothing but bloody messes, anyway.

177 A judge wrote this opinion? It sounds more like a grade-schooler expounding on the reasons they shouldn't abide by their parents rules- replete with bouts of breath-holding and slammed doors.

Probably one of the worst, most porously reasoned decisions I have ever had the displeasure of reading.

178
You guys are getting a little uppity.

And the Left is being exposed a little too much.

So you know that means, right? Yes, either the Left needs to gin up a Republican controversy or some shithead Republican is due for an embarrassing scandal that will send all the wishy-washy conservatives into bed-wetting/apology mode.

179 You can have any color Model T you would like. As long as it is black.

If you have $99.99 we'll make it any color you want.

Henry can go screw himself.

180 due for an embarrassing scandal that will send all the wishy-washy conservatives into bed-wetting/apology mode

Reporting for duty! 

181 ... without consuming health care

Every evening, before I retire I consume me a heaping helping of health care ... and prunes. Health care: the other white meat!

182 To bolster her argument, Judge Kessler cited the precedent established in the case of Rush vs Freewill in which plaintiff Geddy Lee argued, "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice."

183
Isn't Mitch great?

On the Left you have a governor such as Deval Patrick -- a lousy administrator and unpopular governor who just gor reelected thanks to a third-party candidate -- who is willing to stand outside with the unions on the wrong side of the issue.

On the Right you have Mitch Daniels -- a governor with presidential aspirations, nothing to lose politically -- who is happy to allow the Democrats and the union thugs to shit all over the taxpayers of not just Indiana, but the whole country.

184 If the government can regulate all decisions that might have economic effects, then they can assign people to whatever profession would be deemed by those in power to maximize economic efficiency.

That's exactly what Diocletian did!  He enumerated every profession.  He also gave the guilds legal imprimatur. (Unions, anyone?)  He also made professions hereditary.  This was because the inflation in the empire had caused a worthless currency, so taxes were paid in services.  For example, a mule driver would pay his taxes by transporting some goods for the local legion, etc.

But with that system, he had to ensure that there wouldn't be a glut of one profession and a dearth of another.  He didn't know about the free market (and it's not clear how easily the market would have worked without currency and with all of the restrictions he would have put in place) but he thought he could enumerate and regulate and tax every profession.  He was pretty thorough and it worked OK for a while.

But, he gave us feudalism and the dark ages. There could be no innovation because everything was set in stone.

These mistakes have been made before, over and over again.

185 Good one, Warden.

186
I wish we had half as many Republicans willing to stand with us on the RIGHT side of the goddam issues as the Democrats willing to stand on the wrong side of the issues.

187

Hello, all!  Good piece at NRO about redistricting and potential shenanigans that might ensue from Obama's DOJ in the process.  Hans A. Von Spakovsky recommends that states with jurisdictions affected by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act should bypass DOJ approval of their redistricting plans and go straight to Federal District Court, the alternative option for approval. 

"States must understand that they cannot expect to get an impartial hearing from this Justice Department. They may still get a panel of liberal judges in federal court, but at least normal evidentiary standards will apply. In court, DOJ will have to provide actual evidence of discrimination — not the rank hearsay and imaginary evidence often considered in its own administrative review. Moreover, states will be able to cross-examine their accusers in court. That doesn’t happen in the administrative setting. Indeed, the Justice Department often refuses to even tell states who has accused them of discrimination in their redistricting process."

 

188 Well-and I am sure I am not alone, that little libtard scam re:Gifford shooting elicited an "anyone who accuses me of being an accessory to mass murder because of my mainstream conservative political beliefs* can go choke on a bag of dicks."

For some reason, the other parents in our "Moms and Dads" group (who are uniformly either progressives or hipsters or both) seem oddly guarded in my presence now.

*Not that they would say anything in person, but there facebook walls were covered with, well, you know what they were saying.

189 This appears to be unauthorized interstate use of thought commerce.

I have consulted my liberal judge, and you must now all send me $10.00, or participate in a street rally in praise of Obama.

190 Give me Liberty, or Give me Death.

Today, just how close are we to the same likelihood again?

Posted by: Jimmuy at February 23, 2011 10:29 AM (tUEMJ)

Close, I fear.  But what I fear more is most conservatives value stability, and they simply may not realize when they are past the tipping point and can no longer be effective.    2012 is likely that beckoning chasm.

191

Good post Gabe.  This judge is a loon and as Gabe says this liberal line of judicial thinking places virtually no limits on the regulatory powers of the federal government.  Nowhere in the libs ruling on this is the assertion that we start from a constitutional scope of LIBERTY to begin with. To the contrary, these liberal judges immediately shift into the government's preogative by promulgating as AOK ny and all government activity.  A supreme court judge in the early 20th century coined the term, "Blue Sky" in reference to securities claims and the unscrupulous operators of fraudulent enterprises

Blue Sky was termed as,  "speculative feet which have no more basis than so many feet of Blue Sky."  

I say the unscrupulous judges affirming Obamacare at Constitution are Blue Sky operators in the forward parlor of socialism.

192
Trivia. Who said the quote, when and why?

"Let me tell you what I think the real challenge to us in the next sixty days is. It isn't the left. It isn't the Democrats. It's us."

193 25 Actually they are not required to treat all cases. What happened was that they were mandated to treat "life threatening" cases. Then lawfare took over and every case became "life threatening. Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2011 07:51 AM (M9Ie6) I see. So the legal profession strikes again. If our side ever gets a true majority again, and the presidency, we need to make tort reform a top-5 priority item. That will go a long way to neuter those who abuse the system. If we limited the must-treat requirement to simple, inexpensive, yet vital activity (like setting a broken bone, for example) I would have a lot less issue with it. I'm sure that our society is rich enough that we can prevent poor people from walking around with ill-knit bones. But some kind of sensible limitations have to be set." --------------------------------------------- At my hospital, on any given day 60-70% of ER signins are pure bullshit: Colds, sore knees, drug seekers, etc. We have to treat them all at great expense and manpower per Federal law. There is no stabilize and transfer; no turning away. And don't get me started on how many throw a prescription in your face and scream spittle flecked curses at you when they don't get the "drugs they deserve" after you spend two hours and hundreds of dollars in resources finding nothing wrong that merits narcotics. I can't wait for everything to be free; I'm sure that will fix everything.....

194

In all the political/quasi-legal discussions I've had, I don't think I've ever heard that idea. Sounds great to me. I'll have to go bounce it off some of the law-knobs at Althouse or somewhere like that. I can already hear their cries of horror. It'll probably be the first and last time they all agree on anything.

Posted by: Lincolntf at February 23, 2011 10:00 AM (xMT+4)

For the record, my proposal is only partially serious.  I propose it because I expect our lawyer overlords in government to understand what single-payer actually means since they aren't bright enough to understand anything beyond their own experience.

195

Newt Gingrich said it in late 1995.

Why: Because the Republicans in the Senate were opposed to and kept killing the bills that were fulfilling the Contract with America.

196 When I bought my car I had thoughts of buying another make and model. Do I owe these guys money? Ditto those hot streetwalkers in DC. I am so confused. I must stop thinking in order to save money.

197 Once you get to this level of moral equivalence, anything is possible:

"This is Normandy," says Brian Austin, one of the protesting Madison police officers, heading home for the night. "If we lose this, everything changes."

198 178
ObamaCare proponents are America-haters who take the view of government that the rest of the world (outside of the US) hold; that the the government essentially owns the nation and everything in it (an artifact of the royals who owned and ran all nations before the US was constructed) and that this all-powerful government only allows individuals to feel as if they own things ... while it is convenient to the government.  ObamaCare proponents hate America and our idea that the government doesn't own our nation and isn't allowed to direct anything it wants.  They want the government to be in full control of everything, and that includes all private information.
Posted by: iknowtheleft at February 23, 2011 10:32 AM (N49h9)

Agree with this in toto, with one additional point. They do not see those of us who oppose the program not as being people who seek free exercise of their rights. In their tortured minds, no one cannot be not owned by something. Ipso facto, ObamaCare opponents must be owned by evil corporations.

It's very much akin to why they cannot grasp the seeming lack of structure and leadership in the Tea Party movement.

199 206
They do not see those of us who oppose the program not as being people who seek free exercise of their our rights.
Posted by: ya2daup at February 23, 2011 11:01 AM (HmCnI)

Fixed.

200 Can't a case be made for the economic impact of ideology? Of choice of religion, or lifestyle, or the decision to have children or remain single? Research shows that if an individual completes high school, works full time, and marries before having children their chance of being poor falls from 12% to 2%...surely for the good of our society we should then mandate completion of high school, a minimum of 40 hrs of work per week, and marriage before children are allowed, those breaking the mandate owe society some sort of tax or fine...no? Liberals reading the blog...please reply...we now need to have this discussion. You want to open this can of worms, I can spend a lifetime thinking of mandates you will not like.

201 179 I made the choice to have a cup of coffee this morning.  At some point in the future a judge could decide that that's an "irresponsible" choice.  I'm not looking forward to that day.

------

If you didn't buy overpriced Starbucks coffee, the difference between that and what you bought is imputed income that must be declared on your taxes. You'll need to keep track of them and submit a 1099 at the end of the year.

202 It's pretty obvious that the Judge made a partisan decision to find Obamacare constitutional, and then found a flimsy rationale to substantiate it.

That is how the Dems work.  They make up their mind first, and then create "facts" to back their argument.  Then the media reports it as a horse race...  "Dems Win!"

If the media actually explained to the sheeple that this ruling opens the door for any and all abuses, they may find themselves on our side of the issue.

203 I suggest we all form a people's collective,  strike against compulsory medical coverage, use collective bargaining -- that sacred protector of upper-middle class professional's lifestyles-- plus a little street action.  We can split into the National Brotherhood of Genteel Conservatives, who have nice, mannerly picket signs, and the National Brotherhood of Obstreperous Fed Up Morons, whose picket signs spell out WTF, and pictures of Obama as Hitler.  Members of the latter must furnish their own brass knuckles and crowbars.  Members of the former can decry violence and bad language.

204 All we can do is pray that the supreme court does the right thing. It is truly scary that liberals and their judges believe that the government can make us buy a product. If the supreme court does not strike down the healthcare law then we are not living in a free country anymore. Regulating INACTIVITY! Sickening.

205 116
It is a short step to eliminating the middleman and just having your entire salary sent directly to the government (where 16000 new IRS agents are awaiting your check), and let the IRS refund what you actually need (based on the soon to be published list of unearned income tax credits).
Posted by: Faux Hrothgar fomenting dissent at February 23, 2011 09:28 AM (DCpHZ)

I recall reading, sometime in the last three months, that the government of the United Kingdom is considering doing this very thing.

206 Von Spakovsky recommends that states with jurisdictions affected by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act should bypass DOJ approval of their redistricting plans and go straight to Federal District Court, the alternative option for approval.

My understanding was that that last BS law passed that added homosexuals to the law also added a provision that took the judgment away from the courts and gave it to the DOJ directly.

207 The word responsible has been redefined in the NewSpeak dictionary and it has always been that way.

208 All we can do is pray that the supreme court does the right thing.

BWAHAHAHAHA.....

We are so screwed.

209 210
That is how the Dems work.  They make up their mind first, and then create "facts" to back their argument.
Posted by: Cooter at February 23, 2011 11:07 AM (PV82J)

Who revealed the inner workings of our methods to you?? C'mon, out with it!!

210 OT and void of intelligence, but I'll ask it anyway:

What's the reference to "honey badger" mean? 


*waits patiently for answer with tilted head and curious look.....

211 What a waste of time and money. Take this to the Supreme Court NOW

212

I am treading on Monty's ground here but I did want to inject something on the topic of economics that will assuage our outrage over the lates liberal Obamcare ruling. 

The assuaging agent that will reduce anxiety over Obamacare is the fact, we will probably be in a hyperinflationary great depression within the next year with geopolitical instability and the emergence of a unified currency brokered by the IMF with the upshot of the U.S. no longer maintaining a USD functioning as a reserve currency.

So folks . . . let us not worry about the small stuff.  Instead, purchase good shoes for the upcoming soup lines.  We could work together to come up with a new model and style of shoe.  We could call it our 'Polit-Toe' from the Poliburo Line.  Or maybe, 'Acme BK.' 

213 Posted by: Tami at February 23, 2011 11:11 AM (VuLos)

Tami always states the obvious, eh?  heh

214 206 178 ObamaCare proponents are America-haters who take the view of government that the rest of the world (outside of the US) hold; that the the government essentially owns the nation and everything in it (an artifact of the royals who owned and ran all nations before the US was constructed) and that this all-powerful government only allows individuals to feel as if they own things ... while it is convenient to the government. ObamaCare proponents hate America and our idea that the government doesn't own our nation and isn't allowed to direct anything it wants. They want the government to be in full control of everything, and that includes all private information. Posted by: iknowtheleft at February 23, 2011 10:32 AM (N49h9) Agree with this in toto, with one additional point. They do not see those of us who oppose the program not as being people who seek free exercise of their rights. In their tortured minds, no one cannot be not owned by something. Ipso facto, ObamaCare opponents must be owned by evil corporations. It's very much akin to why they cannot grasp the seeming lack of structure and leadership in the Tea Party movement. ------------------------------------------------------- Unfortunately, in addition, there is a powerful faction that believes that the greatest sin of the West was empowering and basing our system on the individual, when the exact opposite is true: it was the World's greatest achievement. Those factions honestly believe Orwell's fictional description that freedom is slavery and those that don't assimilate are a lesser evolved life form and should be expunged with no penalty.

215 Are Democrats telling me what responsible financial behavior is? Consider me Honey Badger.

216 What's the reference to "honey badger" mean?

Honey Badger don't give a shit.

217 ....or maybe that is what you said...

218 It was a weekend post

219 Kessler's reasoning reminds me of "Catch 22". Great book. Never thought we would degrade ourselves to such a level. Give me your tired, homeless, and stupid. I have just the country for you. I am guessing Kessler doesn't really recognize free choice as a defining proposition for the construct of a free society. My guess is her level of reasoning is free is stuff other people pay for.  See what happens when you promote idiots from public housing into judges.

220 What's the reference to "honey badger" mean?

We could tell you, but then we'd have to feed you to the honey badger.

221

ppfp,

Go to the main page and search for "Nasty Honey Badger" and watch the video below the fold, not the one showing.

222
honey badger is pissing me off, that's what it means


go back to Sunday and look for the post with the stupid SNL vid

223 OT and void of intelligence, but I'll ask it anyway: What's the reference to "honey badger" mean? *waits patiently for answer with tilted head and curious look..... Posted by: prettypinkfluffypanties at February 23, 2011 11:13 AM (cQfrc) There was a post regarding the honey badger here this weekend.

224 @175....awesome. And amen.

225 "...oh no there's a cobra...."

226
so...

which sidebar item you reckon Ace will make his first post from?

227

This is such a ridiculous argument that choosing not to buy something is commerce.  WTF?

If I go grocery shopping, does the state have a right to charge me sales tax on all the things in the store that I chose not to buy?  This judge would say yes.  What a crock.

228 224 What's the reference to "honey badger" mean?

Honey Badger don't give a shit.

Posted by: Beto at February 23, 2011 11:15 AM (j5CHE)

< It's apparently a reference from Middle English wherein the syllable 'Ho' from the polysyllabic 'Honey' is the hard sound and the 'ney' is silent.  Badger similarly has a silent syllable in 'ger.'  Put it all together and the inference and sound of the afore Honey Badger is really, 'Ho Bad.' 

229 175 Posted by: Jimmuy at February 23, 2011 10:29 AM (tUEMJ) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Damn, that was awesome.

230

So under that, if I think about sex all the time but don't have it, am I promiscuous?

Excuse me, I have to search for a tree falling in the forest and see if it makes a sound. . . .

231 This line of reasoning would be tolerable if the idiots could actually make the trains run on time, but given their track record of success, there really is no excuse for free men and women to be subject to such utter trash. I feel so Egyptian right now.

232 We believe in the people's dictatorship where government is the collective "I."

233 If I go grocery shopping, does the state have a right to charge me sales tax on all the things in the store that I chose not to buy?

Don't be silly we would only charge you tax on the things we thought you should have bought. Oh and doubled the tax on the things we thought you shouldn't have bought that you bought anyways.

234

Word to Jimmuy and AmishDude.

235 Tami always states the obvious, eh?  heh

Posted by: prettypinkfluffypanties at February 23, 2011 11:14 AM (cQfrc)

??

236 Thanks!  I'll go find it....

"< It's apparently a reference from Middle English wherein the syllable 'Ho' from the polysyllabic 'Honey' is the hard sound and the 'ney' is silent.  Badger similarly has a silent syllable in 'ger.'  Put it all together and the inference and sound of the afore Honey Badger is really, 'Ho Bad.' "

AS silly as that answer is, I was afraid it had something to do with sticky, scary lady bits. 

237 Say! Have any of you fellows chanced to look up what Wisconsin has for its "State Animal"? Well, go back there, and look at the State Insect.

It's prophetic, I tell ya. Nothing happens without a reason.

238 "Posted by: Tami at February 23, 2011 11:27 AM (VuLos)"

I was complimenting your bluntly stated:  "We're screwed."  I mean, really, that says it all in two words.  You usually don't mess around and get right to the point. 

das all I meaned

239 AS silly as that answer is, I was afraid it had something to do with sticky, scary lady bits. 

Posted by: prettypinkfluffypanties at February 23, 2011 11:27 AM (cQfrc)

<  Ho Bad is the umbrella def.

240 I was complimenting your bluntly stated:  "We're screwed."  I mean, really, that says it all in two words.  You usually don't mess around and get right to the point. 

das all I meaned

Posted by: prettypinkfluffypanties at February 23, 2011 11:29 AM (cQfrc)

Ooooh....okay.  Most days I don't really have a point...I'm usually just thrashing around.  

241 "I'm usually just thrashing around.  "

Heh...as long as somebody doesn't think you're having a seizure, that's cool. 

242

"AS silly as that answer is, I was afraid it had something to do with sticky, scary lady bits."

 

Must be lunch time.

243 Somebody QUICK, shove a stick in Tami's mouth so she doesn't bite her tongue!!!  Better yet, duct tape her down!!

244 248
Ooooh....okay.  Most days I don't really have a point...I'm usually just thrashing around.
Posted by: Tami at February 23, 2011 11:31 AM (VuLos)

So AoSHQ is like a mosh pit, only with words?

245

Somebody QUICK, shove a stick in Tami's mouth so she doesn't bite her tongue!!!  Better yet, duct tape her down!!

Oh, man, is it Thursday again already?

246

241 Your friendly Govt tax decider

Whew, I was worried there for a minute.  But if the gubmint is choosing this stuff for me, why then, I know they'll do a great job!

247

It's an interesting thought experiment to imagine the reaction of Madison if someone told him that 230 years from now, a federal judge would interpret the Commerce Clause, a provision intended to allow the federal government to regulate aspects of commercial activity that touch upon more than one state, as authority to regulate the thought processes of supposedly free citizens and to compel them to buy certain products.

248 Heh...as long as somebody doesn't think you're having a seizure, that's cool. 

Posted by: prettypinkfluffypanties at February 23, 2011 11:35 AM (cQfrc)

Oh wait...that's these people in white coats.

249 see....the seizures are affecting my typing.

250

It's an interesting thought experiment [...]

Posted by: Cicero at February 23, 2011 11:53 AM (QKKT0)

That'll be $12.57.  We'll add it to your taxes.

Thank you for supporting ObamaCare.

251

Somebody QUICK, shove a stick in Tami's mouth so she doesn't bite her tongue!!!  Better yet, duct tape her down!!

Oh, man, is it Thursday again already?

Posted by: Mama AJ at February 23, 2011 11:39 AM (XdlcF)

Don't touch me!  It's Wednesday!

252 149 146
I'm still waiting for one of the geniuses to explain to me how the Commerce Clauses is apropos to something that can not be purchased across state lines.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at February 23, 2011 09:52 AM (1hM1d)

Thread winnah.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 23, 2011 09:55 AM (BvBKY)

Yes, so why are the Repubs chanting for sales of health insurance across state lines?

Oh, wait, I know, they're Repubs.

253 PA@65 Looked it up and I think you want the newer Special Operations Forces Medical Handbook from the US GPO for $60. Daughter has taken her EMT Basic training plus is 3rd year in BS Nursing program and has a birthday in 2 weeks. Getting it. Self interest - under Ogabecare I won't be able to afford decent insurance so here's a good backup plan. 

254

<  Ho Bad is the umbrella def.

Posted by: Journolist at February 23, 2011 11:29 AM (iHfo1)

Dude, the First Rule of Honey Badger is "Don't Explain Honey Badger," not "Make up random shit about Honey Badger."

255 Oh, wait, he's a journolist - making up random shit is what he *does*.

256

If I have contempt for a court, isnÂ’t that contempt still there, even if I donÂ’t express it ?  But the courtÂ’s failure to fine me for that contempt shows that IÂ’m actually not doing something that would be fined if I was doing what IÂ’m thinking.

257 Late to the game, but--

--if deciding whether, or how much, or what kind of, health insurance to buy affects interstate commerce and is therefore controllable by the gov't--

--don't your college major, choice of profession, hobbies, who you marry, how many kids you have, where you go on vacation, what state you live in also affect interstate commerce?

What idiot lawyer didn't think of pointing that out?

258 When the Clintons ran the "imputed tax" up the flagpole was the last day I have ever considered voting for a Democrat.  You have to be actively evil to consider that a just use of the power to tax.

259 Judge Vinson took up and answered this arguments very tightly in his decision. I what how, if any, any answer Judge Kessler would make to his reasoning: There is quite literally no decision that, in the natural course of events, does not have an economic impact of some sort. The decisions of whether and when (or not) to buy a house, a car, a television, a dinner, or even a morning cup of coffee also have a financial impact that --- when aggregated with similar economic decisions --- affect the price of that particular product or service and have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. To be sure, it is not difficult to identify an economic decision that has a cumulatively substantial effect on interstate commerce; rather, the difficult task is to find a decision that does not. ... “Economic” cannot be equated to “commerce.” And “decisions” cannot be equated to “activities.” Every person throughout the course of his or her life makes hundreds or even thousands of life decisions that involve the same general sort of thought process that the defendants maintain is “economic activity.” There will be no stopping point if that should be deemed the equivalent of activity for Commerce Clause purposes.

260

rush "free will"

There are those who think that life has nothing left to chance
A host of holy horrors to direct our aimless dance

A planet of play things
We dance on the strings
Of powers we cannot perceive
'The stars aren't aligned
Or the gods are malign...'
Blame is better to give than receive

[Chorus:]
You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that's clear
I will choose freewill

There are those who think
That they were dealt a losing hand
The cards were stacked against them
They weren't born in Lotusland

All preordained
A prisoner in chains
A victim of venomous fate
Kicked in the face
You can't pray for a place
In heaven's unearthly estate

[Chorus]

Each of us
A cell of awareness
Imperfect and incomplete
Genetic blends
With uncertain ends
On a fortune hunt that's far too fleet

[Chorus]

too much?

261 test

262 Faustus with the mostest.

263 The argument that everyone at some time must consume health care is a false argument, at least how it applies to Obamacare. Matt. how to lose a beer belly

264 Thanks for posting. Last I checked there were over 700 waivers granted.  Guess those people have better mindthoughts or somethin'. Cheers, weight loss eating plan for women and weight loss diet plan for women

265 I was under the impression that there was still an exemption for Amish Americans. Either way, i'll be following this one closely. Thanks for posting. DH@ lose stomach fat for men and how to get abs fast