Obama warns 'unelected' Supreme Court against striking down health law

Originally posted by stanats

Originally posted by stanats

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by LadyTwoCrowns

 

AGAIN, please provide me with proof that someone has not received treatment due to not being able to pay, or not having health insurance.

I suspect you will evade the question again, and babble on about how unfair one thing is, or that all Conservatives are the evil spawn of Satan himself.

45,000 deaths annually from lack of insurance so take your pick:

news.harvard.edu...

The GOP has a better record than Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and all the mooslims combined at killing Americans, including the year 2001

edit on 3-4-2012 by stanats because: additional point

Actually...Americans in general are better at killing Americans than our enemies could ever aspire to be.

The Civil War produced a ballpark of somewhere between 800-900,000 military casualties (record keeping was a bit sketchy...nobody has an "exact" number). This is essentially equal to ALL AMERICAN MILITARY CASUALTIES IN ALL OF THE WARS OF THE ENTIRE 20TH CENTURY COMBINED!!!

Now for the kicker....there were an estimated 1.4 million CIVILIAN casualties during the Civil War. Remember...this is a war without nukes, chemical weapons, air power, smart bombs, grenades, helicopters, or machine guns. Most of these people died one muzzle-loading shot at a time or by being impaled on bayonets. NOW THAT'S DETERMINATION!!

Likewise, during the ten years-ish of the Vietnam War we racked up 58,000 US military casualties. During that same exact 10-year period 165,000 or so Americans became murder victims right here at home from the hands of another American citizen.

...puts that 3,500 people who died on 9-11 in perspective, doesn't it?

Originally posted by babybunnies

If you won't get health insurance, I really, really hope that you don't get sick and have to sell your house to cover your hospital stay.

Don't worry 'bout me. I will most certainly get sick at some point - there's really no escape from that, it's part of being mortal. When it becomes more than I can handle, I will die, case closed. As I said, NO ONE escapes the Reaper forever, I don't care how much money you throw at the insurance ponzi scheme - you will not escape death thereby.

No, I won't be selling my house to cover it, either. What waste of resources THAT would be! I don't go to hospitals, therefore I shouldn't have to pay for a stay that I never make, right? You know people DIE in hospitals, don't you? I can do that at home, for free - as long as I don't sell my home to enrich some medic or insurance carrier.

Honestly, I believe that if you're afraid to die, that just means there's something wrong with the way you lived.

reply to post by stanats


Taking a cue from macman, I say we outlaw the third leading cause of death for American's each year: iatrogenocide.

IATROGENIC [Gk., iatros, physician, genein, to produce], caused by treatment or diagnostic procedures. An iatrogenic disorder is a condition caused by medical personnel or procedures or through exposure to the environment of a health care facility, including fears instilled in patients by remarks or questions of examining physicians. See also: 'nosocomial', (iatrogenesis, iatrogeny, n.) ~Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 5th Edition, 1998

That's right, death by doctor. So, I'll see your 45,000 annual deaths and raise you:

A recent study published in The Journal of The American Medical Association (2000:284:94) by Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, showed that in the U.S. there are:

· 12,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery
· 7,000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals
· 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals
· 80,000 deaths/year from nosocomial infections in hospitals
· 106,000 deaths/year from adverse effects of medications

This totals 225,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes, placing iatrogeny as the third leading cause of death in the U.S., second only to heart disease and cancer.

Why not let's just outlaw health care since it is the third leading cause of death in America and kills 180,000 more people a year than your claim of death for lack of it.

Originally posted by milominderbinder

As a STRONG proponent of socialized medicine, but ironically one who is ALSO strongly against Obamacare... I say "Good for you". Civil Disobedience is the heart of the democratically inspired American republic. Personally...I wish we had a WHOLE LOT MORE disobedience these days across a WIDE RANGE of issues.

History tells us that in the aftermath of all the really bad atrocities we monkey's willfully participate in that there are a SHOCKING number of perpetrators who claim they "were just following orders" in the aftermath.

While we are it...somebody should tell our damn cops to stop attacking peaceful demonstrators with chemical weapons that the US has agreed not to even use on foreign enemies during times of open and unadulterated warfare and we should remind the military that they don't have to do a DAMN THING that they think is wrong.

The world would be a much better place if we were so willing to simply follow orders so blindly.

Props to you, my friend.

It's odd to see you and I agree on much of anything, but I gave you a star for that - there may be hope for the world yet. I read your post about Socialized medicine with OPTIONAL participation, and I can't find fault with that. I don't care what others do, as long as I'm not forced to play along with twisted arm. I could probably get behind a proposal like that, so long as it guarded individual liberty and respected it.

The bit about use of chemical weapons prohibited in war on demonstrators is news to me - I'd like a link to that, if you've got one handy, so I can educate myself. I thought it was all tear gas and pepper spray.

My "disobedience" will be just that, until THEY decode to apply force, at which point like will be met with like. Sure, they'll kill me in the end, but I think it's better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.

Sort of ironic that this "health care", if it's upheld, will wind up killing me, no?

Originally posted by khimbar

Originally posted by LadyTwoCrowns
Will be back later. LOL, maybe a conservative will have put forth a good alternative to Obamacare, where EVERYONE GETS TO SEE A DOCTOR and have equal treatment, because MONEY IS NOT GOD. I won't hold my breath, though. You all are more heartless than the crack dealers on the corner.

I'm not in the USA but howabout if you stopped bombing the # out of the brown people in the world and being the 'democracy' spreading war mongering policeman?

Would that not pay for some of it? Or is that too simple?

edit on 3-4-2012 by khimbar because: (no reason given)

That's far too simple...you are clearly not American.

In order to get us to "believe" in anything it requires that logic and reason is circumvented by nothing other than pure emotion. Any kind of emotion will do...but our favorites are fear, rage, hate, and shame. Once we have stopped using our heads in any way, shape, or form...then we are ready to head out to the polls and elect our "leaders".

Think about it...the MAJORITY of political "issues" which have determined our federal elections for AT LEAST the last twenty years and arguably the last 35 years have been all more or less centered around a national political fetish and preoccupation with how we use our genitals.

1. Abortion alone has not only swung presidential elections...it has swung more House and Senate seats than can even be calculated.

2. Birth Control...and you thought the issue was resolved in the '60's huh? Nope! It's back again and more ridiculous than ever.

3. Gays In the Military- It was a big deal during the Clinton Administration and the whole "family values" thing is what LAUNCHED Newt Gingrich's "republican revolution" or whatever...and now it's "controversial" again in 2011.

4. Gay marriage- That was last election cycle's "hot button". We can look forward to seeing this one again for another 30 years or so.

5. Monica Lewinsky- Al Gore lost the presidency in '00 in large part due to whom Bill Clinton chose to ejaculate with. The election wouldn't have even been close if not for the years and years of worth of public interest in our Presidents penis usage.

6. Sex Scandals galore- Both republican AND democratic congress people ROUTINELY "step down" over questions surrounding who they are screwing.

...I can go on and on...but you get the picture, right?

Now...could you do me a favor? Let's take that perfectly logical solution you posed of buying some penicillin instead of all those cruise missiles and wrap it up in a flag, hang a bible on it, and infuse it with sexual shame I might have a chance of getting my Congressman to run it up the flag pole, so to speak. If you can figure out some way to also add an element of fear surrounding Communists and Al-Queda...it will be damn slam dunk.

Yes...we really are that stupid here in the States.

sounds like Obama is throwing a tantrum cuz he didnt get his way

at least the supreme court is standing up for the people!

Originally posted by Nite_wing
I think you are premature.
Our Dear Leader said if Congress couldn't act, he would do it himself.
Now, after taking action and ignoring Congress, all he has to do is appoint himself Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
Problem solved. No more resistance.

This is ridiculous.

The Supreme Court might as well strike down ANYTHING voted on by the President and Congress if they stop Medical Reform. Congress has the responsibility and power to TAX -- and if they cannot compel payments, then we might as well get rid of income tax and auto insurance as well.

The Supreme Court has basically a fascist agenda -- and they don't want anything that helps the average worker in this nation if they can help it.

I'd MUCH prefer Universal Health Care which would cost HALF of what we already pay because it would get rid of most of the waste and fraud that comes with for profit billing. But we can't have that.

I'm not a fan of Obama -- but he TRIED to do one thing, while sacrificing so much for the public good to the Oligarchs on every front.

The SCOTUS barely bothers with legal precedent or Constitutional justifications anymore -- they clearly are creating law by interpreting things that fall in line with their agenda. Everything Conservatives have said is kind of true -- but about themselves. Activist Judges are real -- but they work for Corporations and the Vatican it seems.

LOOK PEOPLE. OBAMAS big picture is starting to SCARE THE S**T OUT OF ME. What OBAMA would be more capable of doing in his second term and judging bye the unconstitutional bills he has passed and some without congress and now THE CRACKING DOWN OF MEDICINAL cannabis (same with Romney). SERIOUSLY,,HES GOTTA GO MAN..I voted for him so my beef is about personal freedoms and rights. Germany was flowing with arts and culture, people were happy and then comes hitler,,..TO OBAMA LOVERS, I know the three stooges in the GOP really suck bad and OBAMA IS WAY MORE COOL ON THE OUTSIDE but look at the big picture here, RON PAUL is the only choice , he would never do shady deals, the economy is screwed either way, with PAUL we would still be broke but free of worrying about communism..I dont know what else to say but PLEASE research Obamas shady deals before voting for him,,as for who the alternative will be, it still could be RON PAUL, ,Californians and Oregonians are known as being more "awake" to bullshiz , I mean You wont see NEWT winning Cali like south Carolina where Im from even though there were tons of Paul people and 1000 dead people voted. I realize that watching Mitt Romney flip flop and Santorum lying that it makes me want to vote for Obama too ,,BUT,, AND I KNOW THEY ARE ALL THE SAME except Paul ,,,BUT I dont see romney disrespecting the constitution, but then I kinda do so Paul is the only way. Sorry to the Folks reading this that dont like Paul and its not a Paul intended comment but I do find that people that dont like him havent done research, just watched CNN...If Obama was preaching the same stuff as Paul, I would be wearing an Obama shirt right now....

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by stanats

 

Taking a cue from macman, I say we outlaw the third leading cause of death for American's each year: iatrogenocide.

IATROGENIC [Gk., iatros, physician, genein, to produce], caused by treatment or diagnostic procedures. An iatrogenic disorder is a condition caused by medical personnel or procedures or through exposure to the environment of a health care facility, including fears instilled in patients by remarks or questions of examining physicians. See also: 'nosocomial', (iatrogenesis, iatrogeny, n.) ~Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 5th Edition, 1998

That's right, death by doctor. So, I'll see your 45,000 annual deaths and raise you:

A recent study published in The Journal of The American Medical Association (2000:284:94) by Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, showed that in the U.S. there are:

· 12,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery
· 7,000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals
· 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals
· 80,000 deaths/year from nosocomial infections in hospitals
· 106,000 deaths/year from adverse effects of medications

This totals 225,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes, placing iatrogeny as the third leading cause of death in the U.S., second only to heart disease and cancer.

Why not let's just outlaw health care since it is the third leading cause of death in America and kills 180,000 more people a year than your claim of death for lack of it.

edit on 3-4-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)

Game, set and match. Or, checkmate if you prefer. Hell, yell out "BINGO!" Either way, you win one internets .

/TOA

It's odd to see you and I agree on much of anything, but I gave you a star for that - there may be hope for the world yet. I read your post about Socialized medicine with OPTIONAL participation, and I can't find fault with that. I don't care what others do, as long as I'm not forced to play along with twisted arm. I could probably get behind a proposal like that, so long as it guarded individual liberty and respected it.

Thanks dude. You know...once you strip away the media brainwashing I personally think that around 80% of the country is a Ron Paul supporter. I have NEVER voted Republican in my lifetime...but I can't stand Obama for all of the same reasons I couldn't stand his predecessor. Undeclared wars, corporate bailouts/welfare, and a shredding of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Historically speaking, I think that socialized medicines GREATEST strength comes from it's ability to hopefully PREVENT health problems in people who do not take care of themselves for one reason or another. Perhaps they want to but lack the money and/or insurance to do so...or perhaps they are just slovenly asshats. Ufortunately, every single population of every single country on this planet, throughout the sum total of human history has had asshats. I just don't think it's very pragmatic to think that we are going to eradicate the phenomenon from our country for the first time in human history.

True, we should not ENCOURAGE being lazy asshat...that's just plain stupid...but we gotta understand that we are just plain and simple always going to have poor, stupid, and lazy people or some combination thereof. Again...not to say that all poor people are lazy and stupid...those are three distinct categories. I grew up blue collar, and busted my ass for peanuts until I was about 20 yrs old.

Thus, if these people are going to exist no matter what...isn't it cheaper to catch that tumor before it even turns malignant? You can sometimes get those things popped out right in the doctor's office for a couple hundred bucks. If we wait until it's stage four and has spread throughout the entire body...it's a couple million bucks. I just look at it that it's a hell of a lot cheaper to change the oil than to replace the engine. Providing medical care to those who can't afford it or are too damn stupid to do what's in their own self interest is simply a good way to save me tax money later in my opinion.

That being said..."mandatory" anything is bullsh*&%. Thus, in my universe if you were provided with socialized medicine and STILL neglected to go in for your physicals & periodic cancer scans (or whatever) and YOU STILL wound up with stage four cancer SIMPLY due to the fact that you are not taking care of yourself...then the hell with you. No chemo for you. Assuming the individual is mentally competent. I wouldn't be so draconian with an old lady with early stage alzheimers or some poor bastard who literally has a chemical imbalance in their brain. I'm thinking more of the crowd that you see on that peopleofwallmart.com web site.

The bit about use of chemical weapons prohibited in war on demonstrators is news to me - I'd like a link to that, if you've got one handy, so I can educate myself. I thought it was all tear gas and pepper spray.

Yep. It is all pepper spray and tear gas. And the U.S. has agreed not to use it even during full-blown warfare against foreign enemies as part of the CONVENTION ON THE PROHIBITION OF THE DEVELOPMENT, PRODUCTION, STOCKPILING AND USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS AND ON THEIR DESTRUCTION treaty (also referred to as the CWC Treaty). Specifically, this provision is found in Article I.5 which reads "Each State Party undertakes not to use riot control agents as a method of warfare.". Link: www.icrc.org...

Likewise, check out how the Patriot Act defines an Act of Terrorism as being intended:
to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.
to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion;
to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, etc.
involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state
occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

...so why aren't those cops who pepper sprayed those students or that little old lady in Seattle last fall being waterboarded at Gitmo again? They are domestic terrorists, are they not? THIS is why I'm not a fan of government over-reach these days.

Link: docs.google.com...

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by Nite_wing
I think you are premature.
Our Dear Leader said if Congress couldn't act, he would do it himself.
Now, after taking action and ignoring Congress, all he has to do is appoint himself Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
Problem solved. No more resistance.

This is ridiculous.

The Supreme Court might as well strike down ANYTHING voted on by the President and Congress if they stop Medical Reform. Congress has the responsibility and power to TAX -- and if they cannot compel payments, then we might as well get rid of income tax and auto insurance as well.

Do you really not get the difference between a tax and Obamacare? A tax is collected for the services of running a country. Obamacare will be a tax collected to pay corporations. It's a bailout, nothing more or less.

/TOA

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by stanats

Originally posted by stanats

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by LadyTwoCrowns

 

AGAIN, please provide me with proof that someone has not received treatment due to not being able to pay, or not having health insurance.

I suspect you will evade the question again, and babble on about how unfair one thing is, or that all Conservatives are the evil spawn of Satan himself.

45,000 deaths annually from lack of insurance so take your pick:

news.harvard.edu...

The GOP has a better record than Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and all the mooslims combined at killing Americans, including the year 2001

edit on 3-4-2012 by stanats because: additional point

Actually...Americans in general are better at killing Americans than our enemies could ever aspire to be.

The Civil War produced a ballpark of somewhere between 800-900,000 military casualties (record keeping was a bit sketchy...nobody has an "exact" number). This is essentially equal to ALL AMERICAN MILITARY CASUALTIES IN ALL OF THE WARS OF THE ENTIRE 20TH CENTURY COMBINED!!!

Now for the kicker....there were an estimated 1.4 million CIVILIAN casualties during the Civil War. Remember...this is a war without nukes, chemical weapons, air power, smart bombs, grenades, helicopters, or machine guns. Most of these people died one muzzle-loading shot at a time or by being impaled on bayonets. NOW THAT'S DETERMINATION!!

Likewise, during the ten years-ish of the Vietnam War we racked up 58,000 US military casualties. During that same exact 10-year period 165,000 or so Americans became murder victims right here at home from the hands of another American citizen.

...puts that 3,500 people who died on 9-11 in perspective, doesn't it?

Talk about going off topic Amazing

Originally posted by xuenchen
Obama himself is a constitutional lawyer.

He taught constitutional law at the U of Chicago for something like 10 years !!!

How could it be that this genius along with his genius advisory staff overlooked the most obvious error in ObamaCare ?

The now famous and mysteriously missing "severability clause"

Boy did they blow it !!

or did they ?

Maybe this is fixed more than we think ?

Beyond belief

This is the amazing part for me. His comments show he has no idea how the Supreme Court even works.

Wonder if it's too late for those poor kids who took his class to get a refund?

I have some preexisting issues. Before Obama Care I could get private coverage for around $12,000 a year. Now it's over $20,000, which I cannot manage. I looked into the Federally funded version and it costs even more; in fact for me it would be $1,760.00 per month. Thank you Obama, now I can't get any. Only 120 people total have benefited.

The entire thing was smoke and mirrors.

It's not about Health Care anyway. It's about power and control. Had it been about Health Care, they would have opened up competition between States and put in place Tort Reform. They all say they believe in that and yet it was left out of the Bill. They know how gullible their partisan base is and they hope enough of the rest of us are stupid also.

Why is it that Obama supporters have not noticed that Health Care costs have risen way faster under Obama Care than before? They can't all be that illiterate, so I assume they don't actually care, it's all an act.

If you could put all the rabid Obama supporters into a room and ask them; if you could make Obama a Dictator for a few years would you vote yes, how many would raise their hands? Plenty I'm betting. That's how all the worlds most vile Dictators started.

Germany was a Free Democratic State when Hitler took over. Strangely enough he had more in common with the Left than the Right. He was for big government and governmental control of everything. He was for the government regulation of business and picking winners and losers. Sound familiar? He used fear and hate to divide the country with one group against another. Does that also sound familiar?

Originally posted by Golf66

I am curious where the idea that I must provide a portion of my earnings, be that in cash, services or goods to another person for their use without my consent as a human right? Where did my rights end and the other person's become a priority?

Where does this human right come from; in the case of an absent government (the natural state of being a human) I think you would be hard pressed to demand anything from anyone as a human right. Go to a country without a government and say it's your human right to have anything see how far you get.

Taking something from someone by force; be that force the point of a gun or the force of law and giving it to another is theft with a fancy name...

Your rights are limited by your intelligence. Since we are too stupid to spend our own money properly, we need to give it to those who are smarter, wiser and more virtuous than us rubes so then can make better decisions then we otherwise could. Take a look at Madame Two Rivers. She has worked in the ghetto. Obviously, she is more compassionate, more ethical and much more intelligent than either of us. Sure, she resorts to using straw man and appeal to emotion fallacies every now and then but that's not important. She knows better how to spend your money than you do. Suggesting that you should be able to spend your money as you seem fit is laughable at best. Inalienable rights should only be reserved to those who actually know what inalienable means.

reply to post by Blaine91555

If you could put all the rabid Obama supporters into a room and ask them; if you could make Obama a Dictator for a few years would you vote yes, how many would raise their hands? Plenty I'm betting. That's how all the worlds most vile Dictators started.

Woody Allen would vote yes:

"It would be good… if [President Obama] could be dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly," Allen is quoted as saying.

Originally posted by AGWskeptic

Originally posted by xuenchen
Obama himself is a constitutional lawyer.

He taught constitutional law at the U of Chicago for something like 10 years !!!

How could it be that this genius along with his genius advisory staff overlooked the most obvious error in ObamaCare ?

The now famous and mysteriously missing "severability clause"

Boy did they blow it !!

or did they ?

Maybe this is fixed more than we think ?

Beyond belief

This is the amazing part for me. His comments show he has no idea how the Supreme Court even works.

Wonder if it's too late for those poor kids who took his class to get a refund?

Also, someone should let Obama know that "unprecedented" does not mean what he thinks it does. God forbid he mispronounces "nuclear" though.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


Obama warns 'unelected' Supreme Court against striking down health law

Where in the transcripts does the POTUS "Warn" the Supreme Court?

That is creative writing by journalists in order to get article hits and of course food for blogs and OPs.

But accuracy still has a place in our national discourse. He did not "warn" the court.

With respect to health care, I’m actually -- continue to be confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the law. And the reason is because, in accordance with precedent out there, it’s constitutional. That's not just my opinion, by the way; that's the opinion of legal experts across the ideological spectrum, including two very conservative appellate court justices that said this wasn’t even a close case.

I think it’s important -- because I watched some of the commentary last week -- to remind people that this is not an abstract argument. People’s lives are affected by the lack of availability of health care, the inaffordability of health care, their inability to get health care because of preexisting conditions.

The law that's already in place has already given 2.5 million young people health care that wouldn’t otherwise have it. There are tens of thousands of adults with preexisting conditions who have health care right now because of this law. Parents don't have to worry about their children not being able to get health care because they can't be prevented from getting health care as a consequence of a preexisting condition. That's part of this law.

Millions of seniors are paying less for prescription drugs because of this law. Americans all across the country have greater rights and protections with respect to their insurance companies and are getting preventive care because of this law.

So that’s just the part that's already been implemented. That doesn’t even speak to the 30 million people who stand to gain coverage once it’s fully implemented in 2014.

And I think it’s important, and I think the American people understand, and the I think the justices should understand, that in the absence of an individual mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to ensure that people with preexisting conditions can actually get health care. So there’s not only a economic element to this, and a legal element to this, but there’s a human element to this. And I hope that’s not forgotten in this political debate.

Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress. And I'd just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint -- that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this Court will recognize that and not take that step.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

If you could put all the rabid Obama supporters into a room and ask them; if you could make Obama a Dictator for a few years would you vote yes, how many would raise their hands? Plenty I'm betting. That's how all the worlds most vile Dictators started.

Woody Allen would vote yes:

"It would be good… if [President Obama] could be dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly," Allen is quoted as saying.

Woody is a pedophile who is guilty of incest.

His opinion is worth less than nothing.

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by AwakeinNM

 

Obama warns 'unelected' Supreme Court against striking down health law

Where in the transcripts does the POTUS "Warn" the Supreme Court?

That is creative writing by journalists in order to get article hits and of course food for blogs and OPs.

But accuracy still has a place in our national discourse. He did not "warn" the court.

You realize that warn and threaten are two different concepts don't you? If Merriam-Webster are to believed then yes the President did warn the Supreme Court. Thanks for the faux-outrage though.