SCOTUS Says Obamacare Stands

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has upheld the individual insurance mandate at the heart of President Barack Obama’s health care plan.

The court rejected arguments that Congress went too far in requiring most Americans to have health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty. Chief Justice John Roberts announced the court’s judgment that allows the law to go forward handing Barack Obama an election year victory with his centerpiece legislative accomplishment.

The mandate takes effect in 2014.

Comments

  1. Keenque says:

    I feel sick… what CAN’T the government require us to do?

    • Nothing. If you don’t do XXXX, we’ll tax you.

      What has happened here is that Obamacare has been deemed Constitutional not as a mandate, but as a tax. The largest tax increase in American history, even though in Obama’s own words “it’s not a tax”.

      Bend over taxpayers. Millions of people looking for “free” healthcare are depending on you to work even harder

      • Uncle Jessie says:

        “Sarge”
        Too bad they didn’t raise taxes to pay for those 2 wars that were put on credit cards? You know, the ones that started our economic down turn…

        Who do you think pays for all the uninsured now [redacted]?

        • Well [redacted], I pay for it with taxes. Along with all the other riff raff.

          And it’s funny how libs whine about the bill for two wars and yet don’t seem to have a problem with dems adding the biggest entitlement program since the Rosevelt years. What happened to Nancy Pelosi’s “pay as you go” anyway? It surely won’t apply to Obamacare, will it, [redacted]?

      • Sam Card says:

        US Congress did not call the mandate a tax. Justice Scalia said, “The individual mandate merely imposes a tax is not to interpret the statue, but to rewrite it”. President Obama insisted it was absolutely not a tax increase. Obama also promised in 2008, that he would not raise taxes on people earning less than 250,000 dollars a year. Many people will not afford the required federally approved health insurance, so they will suffer a tax increase to the IRS. There will probably be disputes and lawsuits to enrich lawyers concerning arguments about the contents of federal approved health insurance from private companies. Mandatory insurance will feed fear and greed. Chief Roberts was correct to say, “The commerce clause does not give license to the federal government to regulate an individual from cradel to grave”. Chief Roberts also said “The federal governmemt does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance”. However, he allowed it by calling the mandate a tax. I see CONTRADICTION in his ruling. Justice Anthony Kennedy said, “Obamacare is an affront to individual liberty and should have been rejected in its entirety”.

        • Roscoe Evans says:

          How about lightening up on the hysteria as to how to define the “mandate” in legal terms?

          I’d suggest, instead of trying to understand this opinion by sitting and wondering about it, you do a little light reading. There are rules and cases and legal presumptions respecting statutory construction and legal interpretation: you can look them up and educate yourself a bit more, as you clearly are a smart guy.

          Hint: courts are obliged to presume that congressional enactments are constitutional.

          • Hint: courts are obliged to presume that congressional enactments are constitutional.

            IF so, then anything Congress passes is constitutional, per your definition.

          • Roscoe Evans says:

            No, it’s not “my” definition. It’s a judicial construct of long standing. Litigants challenging acts of Congress need to overcome it to prevail in their arguments. If you don’t like it, or if you disagree that it exists, well, that’s not really my problem. But it’s tiresome to see folks ignore 200 plus years of case law in an effort to draw “common sense” interpretations of complex constitutional issues out of their own body parts. That just isn’t going to wash anywhere.

            I’ve practiced law for more than 30 years, and I have successfully litigated constitutional issues. I kid around a lot here, but I don’t try to mislead anybody on legal issues. I believe several other commentators here do that all too frequently, and its become more than just a bit tiresome.

          • Another View says:

            You do not need to know case law to understand the Constitution. Indeed, case law is what makes the Constitution “complex”, as it is almost always a departure from the Constitution.

            The Constitution is very simple. Does it permit the federal government to require citizens to buy a product. No, it does not. End of analysis, question answered.

          • Roscoe Evans says:

            Try reading the 16th Amendment. it’s comprehensible, I am sure, with no reference to case law needed. It’s just as you like it.

            Now, please, try to control your urge to mislead our local folks. Remember, there’s a Supremacy Clause and there’s a Supreme Court. The final word on all of this is not litigated on message boards, and not ever by you.

            Work harder. Pay more taxes. Be happier.

          • Another View says:

            I have mislead no one. And unlike you, I do not see everything through the prism of race and party. You are a results oriented ideologue, while I simply view the Constitution and history as it was, not as I wish it were.

            The final word on all of this might well be litigated on message boards, and by me. The fact is that the people can reverse this monstrosity and save the government and the country from this unconstitutional threat to our liberty. The people have the power to say no. And I believe in November that that will be their answer.

            I am happy. I want everyone to pay less taxes. I work plenty hard, thank you. And I want liberty for all, not serfdom with rule by the government few.

          • Sam Card says:

            US Supreme Court, Chief Justice Roberts, has allowed an egregious over-reach of federal taxing power to dictate individual consumer spending. Suppose Congress passed a law that tells all citizens to buy and install smoke detectors in their apartment or home for public safety, or pay a tax penalty. Government would create lots of customers for smoke detector manufacturing companies. Jobs would be created. However, it would be a loss of liberty, if government officials, IRS agents and police had the power to enforce that law, by inspecting our private living spaces to see if we had operating smoke detectors. There is too much Big Brother in our lives. BIG BROTHER is bossy and thinks he knows it all.

          • Another View says:

            By the way. You, being the great constitutional litigator you claim to be, should know that the 16th Amendment does not apply to Obamacare. But perhaps you could cite the Constitutional provision that permits the federal government to tax a citizen for non-activity? And perhaps you could also cite the provision of the federal Anti-Injunction Act that makes the “mandate” a “tax” for constitutional purposes, but not a “tax” for purposes of permitting the courts to decide the question prematurely. I just cannot seem to find those provisions.

          • Roscoe Evans says:

            Except for the occasional three syllable words (and “Constitution,” etc.), your hysterical and frequent resort to ad hominem attacks brings back memories of fourth grade playgrounds. Like any hard working fourth grader, you deserve summer camp. Try it. You’ll like it.

            Then, when you come back, work harder. Pay more taxes. be happier.

            Meanwhile, I’ll be trying to figure out which dogma best suits me. You know. So I can be a better communist-fascist-racist-socialist-idealogue, with demagogic tendencies.

          • Right Winger says:

            “…Work harder. Pay more taxes…”

            Sounds socialist to me. I’d prefer to work harder and keep more money that I earned.

            I have a better idea.

            Get rid of the Dissociative identity disorder.

      • Sam Card says:

        The Congressional Budget Office says, “Affordable Care Act” will cost about 938 billion dollars over 10 years. For decades, employees had payroll deductions for medicare. Senior citiizens enroll in medicare, but younger working people pay into it too. Federal income tax revenue provides funds to Indian Health Service, Center for Disease Control in Georgia, Institute of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, medicaid contributions to all 50 states, veteran health benefits, etc. Consumer advocate Ralph Nader proposed a medicare benefit for all. Ralph Nader challenged General Motors Automobile Company in Detroit Michigan, with his 1965 book, “Unsafe At Any Speed”

    • Then you should feel better knowing that you will now be able to have insurance if you are sick!

      • Another View says:

        Great! Let someone else pay for you! More “free” stuff for society’s takers!

        • Sam Card says:

          Enormous medical bills are the top reason for personal bankruptcy. Five to ten percent of hospital budgets are devoted to charity care. During the past 100 years, average life expectancy in the USA has increased many years due to better access to medical care and improved public health efforts. Environmental laws in the 1970’s have given us cleaner air and water. Because cancer treatment was tremendously expensive, President Richard Nixon invested a lot of tax rmoney into cancer research. Fifteen percent of American people have diabetes, which consume 70 percent of our country’s medical costs. Diabetes can impact blood circulation and eyes. Some diabetics get kidney dialysis and swollen feet. The USA has an obesity epidemic, so we need to exercise and eat for nutrition to avoid heart disease. Promoting wellness will reduce medical bills in the future. Healthier children miss less school. Healthier adults are more productive at work and more effective at parenting, which will save society money in the future.

  2. Another View says:

    The Republic is dead. The rule of law is gone. We need to start over completely. SECEDE NOW!

    • Where's Wendy says:

      You first, AV. We Virginians, and others, tried that secession thing once before and it didn’t work out so well. I’ll take the ballot box over secession any day.

      • Another View says:

        Wendy, what’s with this “We Virginians” stuff? My family has been here since Jamestown, so I need no history lesson from you.

        Secession is, lest you forget, how we shook off our colonial chains. We seceded from Great Britain.

        You should read the Declaration of Independence. It is no less applicable today than in 1776. And Barack Hussein Obama is far more tyrannical than King George III ever dreamed of being.

        • life is good says:

          “Hussein” Meaning “good” “beautiful” or “handsome”. Perhaps given the name because of the peaceful leanings of King Hussein of Jordan.. But, who really knows. I am glad, however that you like the name so much that you add it often.

          Now, as to tyranny, how silly. I won’t deign to give you a “history lesson” since you have roots back to Jamestown, and I am but the great (great etc.) grandaughter of an immigrant, from some person that came to Plymouth Rock. But, I digress.

          Tyranny, in my mind, means there is no hope of changing things. Americans could not vote the evil king out, so we took matters into our own hands and shook the bad English off (twice)

          We now have the freedom to vote for or against anyone…that, sir is not tyranny. If you don’t like the job anyone is doing, you simply have your say at the ballot box. How is that tyranny?

          I would say in my mind tyranny is more like, oh say, a state or commenwealth passing some sort of stupid law saying women who wanted to make a certain choice had to first undergo a rather invasive procedure (that is painful; I doubt men would like it), and pay for it, before they can make their personal, legal choice.

          Now I call that tyranny. I am sure you will disagree. And that is allowed in this country.

          Agree or disagree with the legislation upheld by the court that is the topic of today’s discussion, well, it was a campaign promise fulfilled; agree with it or not, you may have your say in November at the voting booth. But many people voted for someone who said he would overhaul health care. And he did. Like it or not, well, as Sarge likes to say, you have a hundred plus days to think about it.

          You wouldn’t have been able to vote King George out, in this country, you have a say, so get off your tyranny podium, because you have the power to change things, if enough people happen to agree with you.

          • Another View says:

            Obamacare is tyranny. So is the federal government’s power in areas of taxation and the regulation of much of our lives. The federal government ignores the Constitution to impose what it deems best.

            There were elections in the Soviet Union, Saddam’s Iraq, Mubarak’s Egypt and Iran. Were/are those free societies? I think not.

            A democratic majority can easily impose tyranny. Indeed, democracy is a horrible form of government.

            Today we have people in Washington directing us what to do, and how to do it. And taking our money and giving it to those it deems more deserving. THAT IS TYRANNY.

          • life is good says:

            Dang, some would call it majority rules.

          • Go away then, to some finer land and government. Where they do not enforce clean air and water, where they do not ensure that children are protected, where they do not help those in need; where there are no regulations. Go thee and enjoy.

          • Another View says:

            Why don’t you go away? Based upon your post, my guess is that you would be quite happy in pre-1989 Soviet Union. It appears to be rising again in Russia. Pack warm clothes, and good luck to you Comrade!

          • Blah blah serfs blah sheeple blah socialist facist blah blah serfdom blah sheeple blah tyranny blah facist blah tyrants blah

            about sums up what your posts say, when you aren’t copy/pasting from wiki.

          • Sam Card says:

            With our freedom of speech and the press in the USA, opinions can be expressed wihout fear of reprisals. In Russia, Putin retaliates against journalists who criticise him. Tibetan spiritual leader, Dalai Lama, will speak on compassionate medical care at Paramount Theatre in Charlottesville, Virginia on October 11, 2012. Appalachian coal miners with advanced black lung disease has quadrupled since 1980. Since 1970, black lung led to the death of 70,000 miners. Thank you Clarke Daily News for allowing us to discuss health care.

        • Roscoe Evans says:

          Thanks so very much, for the slavery, the segregation, and the factual misstatements about history, the law, and the Constitution. I guess after 400 years, you figure you’re entitled.

          You and the noncom, with your statements about “undesirable” elements of our society, and your inabilities to accept the wishes of democratic majorities, have had your day.

          • life is good says:

            One would hope they have had their day. Truly they are the scariest elements of society today.

          • life is good says:

            One would hope they have had their day. Truly they are one of the scariest elements of society today.

          • Another View says:

            What is scary is the power–the raw, unconstitutional power–that the dictatorship in DC exercises today.

            And what is sad is all the “sheeple” who accept their government checks and baa their contentment at being taken care of. We have become a nation of serfs.

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            I knew I had heard the term ‘sheeple’ somewhere… It is frequently used by individuals in the ‘Sovereign Citizen’ movement for anyone that doesn’t believe in or support ‘The Redemption Theory’, as they do.
            I no longer feel the need to read, debate or respond to any comments by AV.

          • geezlouise says:

            Or as someone else said “quit feeding the beast”…….quite a crew in that group, among them Terry Nichols of OK bombing fame.

            Well according to Wikipedia; his favorite source. Gotta just love fringe groups.

          • Scarier is a lot of postings on mainstream message boards I’ve been seeing. Mainstream mind you. People talking about violence and taking out the government. And indeed, it may be nearing that time. Fully, some +60% of Americans polled wanted to see Obamacare repealed, yet it didn’t happen. The fact that it stood, not on the arguements of Team Obama, but rather on the basis of it being a tax, has done nothing but piss people off even more. Especially since Obama went out of his way back in 09 or 10 to say it wasn’t a tax.

            So now we have Obama either being very slick with his presentation to the court, arguing the mandate under the Commerce Clause, or we have Obama flat out lying to the people to enact this program. Neither is good.

            But what is equally disturbing is Obama’s recent actions on immigration, whereby he is just going to ignore Federal Immigration Law in order to pander to illegal………er, uh………..disenfranchised democrats. Before that ordered the Justice Depat not to go after the “medical” mary jane industry

            Both the ignoring of laws of the country, and the way Obamacare was jammed thru congress, being presented one way to the people all the while being constructed as another, have served to steam a lot of people

            And from the Declaration of Independence

            “That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security”

            I submit that between the out of control spending, the debt and the blatent ignoring of laws all qualify as “destructive behaviors”, and we may be at a point where we need to consider throwing off government and starting over. It seems we no longer have a goernment “of the people, by the people and for the people”

            Now excuse me while I go outside and take a shot at my drone. Being white and a veteran, I”m sure I have one assigned to me.

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            So many Republicans want to scream that Obama hasn’t done what he promised, knowing full well that the majority GOP House, blocks what they don’t like, which is just about everything. In this case (the Healthcare Act) it has been rewritten so many times over the past 3 years in order to compromise with the GOP House. It’s as if the House waited until it was a bastardized version of the original and then passed it (to everyone’s dismay) just so they could point at it and say, ‘see how bad this is?’ Read what the original plan was.

            And you can’t fly into space for 8 years and get back in 4, it’s just not possible.

          • Sam Card says:

            Elinor, you are compassionate and share thoughtful comments. Corporate greed and high medical bills are destroying families. “Affordable Care Act” is over 2,000 pages long. It is an abomination and the President chose to sign it. In summary, what were Obama’s original health reform ideas? Did he want a single payer system? Did he allow too many concessions to get a bad law instead of no bill? Health care lobbyists BOUGHT government influence to create customers for profitable big corporations. (Individual Mandate) Why should healthy people subsidize the medical bills of others who CHOOSE to abuse their bodies. There would be less kidney dialysis, if people took personal responsiblity to avoid getting diabetes. There is too much high fructose corn syrup in processed foods, as a result of government corn subsidies. I choose not to buy beer to enable alcoholics. Each year there is more money spent on medicine drug advertisements and television commercials aimed at gullible children than on public education. Powerful government and big business view us primarily as consumers, instead of citizens. Private health insurance companies should not be entitled to customers by government coercion.

          • Another View says:

            High medical bills are not due to the failings of private business or “corporate greed”. Rather, high medical bills are due to government intervention in, and the distortion of, the market.

            Government imposes severe mandates and regulations on health insurance–who do you think pays for that? Government imposes severe mandates and regulations on medical providers–who do you think pays for that? Government pays for health care for approximately 50% of the population, but refuses to pay market rates–who do you think pays for that?

            Want lower insurance and health costs? Get government out of the way. That is real compassion.

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            Again Sam, this all comes back to BIG BUSINESS and we seem to agree about corporate greed. The pharmaceutical companies are a huge reason that the health care bill is increasing. Americans are spending a staggering $200,000 billion on prescription drugs, and it’s all about profits.

            “Before its patent ran out, for example, the price of Schering-Plough’s top-selling allergy pill, Claritin, was raised thirteen times over five years, for a cumulative increase of more than 50 percent—over four times the rate of general inflation.” The Truth about Drug Companies by Marcia Angell

            Fresh fruits and vegetables are expensive, so is local meat grown with no steroids or antibiotics. Speaking of meat, did you know that Cargill Inc., is the largest privately-held corporation in the United States? I only buy local meat just for those reasons. But Sam, the poor can’t afford to buy healthy food so they buy processed because it’s cheap, which then in turn causes obesity, high cholesterol, diabetes and general ill health and our health care systems simply disease care systems, and there is no money to be made by pharmecuetical companies in actually doing away with sickness and disease.

            Have you heard of a heinous drug called Krokodil? It’s made with codeine pills which in the US have been available by prescription only for many years. In Russia where this drug is mainly being used, codeine is an over the counter drug.

            “President Dmitry Medvedev has called for websites detailing the recipe for Krokodil to be shut down. Banning codeine has been a harder measure to introduce, hindered by lobbying pharmaceutical companies in rigid opposition to it.”
            “A year ago we said that we need to introduce prescriptions. These tablets don’t cost much, but the profit margins are high. Some pharmacies make up to 25 per cent of their profits from the sale of these tablets. It’s not in the interests of pharmaceuticals or pharmacies themselves to stop this.” -The McGill Daily

            I’m sorry Sam, you seem like an intelligent and kind hearted individual and we agree on many points but I’m afraid we will have to agree to disagree on the Healthcare Act.

            “Good health makes a lot of sense, but it doesn’t make a lot of dollars.” Dr. Andrew Saul

          • Another View says:

            The pharmaceutical companies are the reason that a lot of people are alive today. In earlier times, they would have died earlier, and in pain.

            Pharmaceutical companies must charge more during the life of their patents, because it is EXPENSIVE to bring new drugs to the market. And a great deal of that EXPENSE is caused by GOVERNMENT. Someone has to pay for it.

            Fresh food products are not more expensive than processed. Did it occur to you that a certain segment of the population chooses certain foods because they like them?

            Koch Industries is the largest private company in the United States.

          • Another View says:

            Obamacare was passed by the Democrat Congress–House and Senate. The GOP obstructed nothing.

            You can blame Obamacare’s failings on the Democrats–no one else.

            And Obamacare has not been rewritten. But I pray everyday for its repeal.

          • Mr Mister says:

            You forgot the Supreme Court.

          • Another View says:

            You’re right. I did forget that in order to concoct a reason to uphold this clearly unconstitutional act, the Supreme Court rewrote the mandate into a tax.

            Thus, not only did the Supreme Court violate its constitutional duties with respect to Obamacare in upholding it, it did so by further violating its authority by acting as a legislature.

            Thank you for reminding me. I usually try and forget my nightmares.

          • Patriot says:

            And Robert’s opinion was only one of the majority! I guess he is now a communist, leftist, blah blah as well. I see you were elected to that group too on another thread.

          • Another View says:

            Democracy is nothing but two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. Your enthusiasm for legalized theft of some peoples’ monies in order to benefit others is not moral because there are more thieves than victims.

            Read Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged”. When the day comes that the producer class quits, you people in the taker class are in big trouble.

          • Another View says:

            Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner. That is what we face today , citizens voting to steal their neighbors’ wealth, and government obliging them.

    • Sam Card says:

      Be careful of what you wish for as you might like it. I respect President Barack Obama and he won the 2008 election with his campaign for change.

      • Another View says:

        I do not respect Barack Hussein Obama. He is a fascist. He is incompetent domestically and in foreign relations. He is contemptuous of the American Constitution, the American people and the free enterprise system. He systematically violates the Constitution, and thus his oath of office. He lies. He degrades the Office of the President. He takes credit for things he does not accomplish. He demonizes his opponents, and refuses to engage in substantive debate.

        Barack Hussein Obama is a disgrace. He has replaced Jimmy Carter as our worst President ever. Next year he will be living in Chicago.

      • Another View says:

        And by the way; how’s that hopey, changey thingy working out for you? Economic growth at an anemic rate, taxes scheduled to sky rocket, spending to rise to Greece levels, and unemployment is chronic.

        Campaigns do not equal success or substantive accomplishment. Barack Hussein Obama is great at promising. He is sorely deficient at delivering.

        With all due credit to President Reagan, recession is when your neighbor loses his job, depression is when you lose your job, and recovery is when Barack Hussein Obama loses his job.

      • Sam Card says:

        However, you may NOT like or adjust well to change that you wish for. Most Americans did not want increased government intervention in health care. Instead of an individual mandate or compulsory private insurance, the uninsured could have been invited to voluntarily buy into Federal Employees Health Insurance. In Maine, a Boston company can not sell you health insurance. Allowing interstate competition among private health insurance companies is a Republican idea to add choice for consumers.

        • ElinorDashwood says:

          “If Mitt Romney is elected president, the U.S. will experience an economic disaster the likes of which have been recently seen in Ireland.”
          “Ireland is Romney economics in practice, I think Ireland is America’s future if Romney is president.”

          “They’ve laid off a large fraction of their public workforce, they’ve slashed spending, they’ve had extreme austerity programs, they haven’t really raised taxes on corporations or the rich at all, they have 14 percent unemployment, 30 percent youth unemployment, zero economic growth,”
          Romney, suggested that the government should lay off more firemen, policemen, and teachers, according to CNN. Romney’s campaign website says that if elected president, Romney would aim to slash federal spending at least 18 percent by the end of his first term.

          Conservatives like Romney loved Ireland’s economic program before the country fell into a depression, in part because it had “the lowest corporate tax rates,” and Ireland fell into recession again at the end of last year.
          – Nobel-Prize winning economist, Paul Krugman

  3. Outstanding! And, it was a GOP-nominated justice, CJ John Roberts, who was the swing vote.

    • Thanks a lot says:

      Yeah, and 20 years hence, we will be compelled to do what by the next radical President/House/Senate trimuvirate, Democrat or Republican it doesn’t matter. Obama did do what he promised, to fundamentally change the country.
      Too bad he needed to LIE to do it.
      Before you diss me, explain to me then how Obama stood on his head saying that the mandate “was not a tax”, and the court upheld this, based on Congress’ right to levy taxes?
      If we cannot get along using the rules of which we based this country on, and this law was not, then we are living a lie; If this were a marriage, we need counseling. The partisanship needs to stop if we are going to get to the otehr side of the river, or the boat is gong to flip over.

    • Mr Mister says:

      And it was also Roberts who wrote it as a tax.

    • Outstanding!

      Hope you’re ready to open your wallet

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303812104576438130028027412.html

      • Sam Card says:

        There are many poor people and migrant workers who do not file or pay federal income tax. How does the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) plan to track them down to find out if they bought health insurance? How will the IRS make them pay their tax penalty, if they are broke? Will tax supported IRS agents patrol homeless shelters? Expect higher state taxes throughout the USA to fund growing budget busting medicaid. Ever expanding government is intruding in our personal health decisions, such as mandatory vaccines. Think of recently passed laws in Virginia on women’s reproductive health care. I hope that when your mama gets sick, she gets to talk with a doctor first. Bureaucrats pick your pocket and empty your wallet. On this Independence Day, I bemoan our disappearing freedom.

        • You forget that the GOP in Virginia led the press for that women’s health bill, albeit one that was watered down because “the Guv” saw his VP chances go up in flames and tried to salvage any sort of cred with the GOP/Romney folks by pushing the modifications. It was also the uber-conservative Heritage Foundation that pushed much of what became the ACA over a decade ago, that was proffered by neo-con stars like Newt Gingrich, and which informed much of Romney’s version in Massachusetts.

  4. Another View says:

    “Outstanding”? You think that tyranny is outstanding?

    • I was replying to Hmmm, who womhow thinks this is outstanding. Personally, I want to puke

  5. So how will the Federal Government force our , uh hmm, “undocumented workers” to pay the fine for not having health insurance? Oh that’s right, more free stuff. Sickening.

  6. Way to go Dems. You own it now, and all the taxes that come with it. The consequences will come this November

  7. Another View says:

    My firm studied the costs of Obamacare when initially passed. If the law remains in effect, my firm WILL cease providing any insurance coverage to our employees. If the law remains in effect, my firm WILL terminate 20% of our employee workforce.

    Congratulations Obama. Good job.

    • That’s what they want, so everyone will have to go get government health care and be on the government dole

      Outstanding vision for American, Democrats. The bell WILL toll this November

      130 days

      • Eleanor Dashwood says:

        Because of the Affordable Care Act, 2.5 million more Americans under the age of 26 now have insurance through their parents plan. Millions of seniors have received a 50% discount on medication when they hit the prescription drug donut hole, saving them 2 million. Uninsured people in all 50 states with pre-existing conditions now have insurance options. But I suppose you think tax money is better spent bailing out the greedy, irresponsible corporations and banks, over and over again.

        • Jane Boyles says:

          Thank you, Ms. Dashwood, for your factual response to some of the partisan vitriol that has appeared on the comments here.

          The Affordable Care Act will benefit the most vulnerable members of American society – children and young adults under the age of 26, are now allowed to stay on their parents’ plans; those who have pre-existing conditions, who were previously uninsurable, now have coverage under the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan; seniors who had previously reached a dollar limit imposed by their insurance companies, now will be able to retain their insurance cover because insurance companies are no longer allowed to impose lifetime limits; and people with disabilities will now be able to get insurance cover through the pre-existing condition option.

          Yesterday’s confirmation by Chief Justice Roberts and the Supreme Court that The Affordable Care Act should be upheld is a huge affirmation that fairness and compassion are still the bedrocks of American society.

        • I could care less about the banks. To me, the stimulus should have come back to the people, since this is now a consumer driven eceonomy. If a bank is about to go under, make sure the government backs up the FDIC that covers the people’s money and let the bank go under. That’s the way the free market works

        • “Because of the Affordable Care Act, 2.5 million more Americans under the age of 26 now have insurance through their parents plan. Uninsured people in all 50 states with pre-existing conditions now have insurance options.”

          Yes ELeanor, and it will cost EVERYONE MORE. As the first article says, “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”. Well, at least not AFTER everyone has been snowed. Obama and his democrat minions promised free lunch. He promised that people making under a certain amount would not see “a dime in taxes”.

          Now, not only are premiums for folks that have insurance expected to keep rising, (even though we were promised they would go down) but it seems “the poor” are going to get smacked as well. And I do believe there are still 30-40 million uninsured even after all of this. And of course when dems say they now want to “move on”, they probably mean they want to “move on” to getting illegals insured next.

          Read and learn. The guy that did the “study” for Obama and ObamaTAX Care is now backtracking on the costs

          http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/03/22/how-obamacare-dramatically-increases-the-cost-of-insurance-for-young-workers/

          http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/11/obamacare-architect-expect-steep-increase-in-health-care-premiums/

          And, for the “poor” that were expecting “Free” healthcare.

          WSJ Chief Economist: 75% of Obamacare Costs Will Fall on Backs of Those Making Less Than $120K a Year

          http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/30/wsj-chief-economist-75-of-obamacare-costs-will-fall-on-backs-of-those-making-less-than-120k-a-year/

          How anyone, ANYONE, could believe a government program was going to lower the cost of something is beyond me.

          Name me one government program that stays in budget. Name one program that never expands

          Good luck

          [redacted]
          126 days

          • Sam Card says:

            In March 2012, the US Congessional Budget Office reported “tremendous amount of uncertainty” about the effect of “Affordable Care Act” on employer-based coverage. It estimated that as many as 20 million FEWER Americans will get health insurance through their employers by 2019. Individual health insurance policies are tremendously expensive. During World War II, there were wage and price controls in the USA, so employers and unions would seek out new employees with benefits, such as health insurance. Back then, providing health insurance through an employer was not too costly and I believe it could be written off as a business expense, when filing corporate income tax. Back then, I suspect that health insurance companies offered reasonably priced policies for customers with the goal of creating dependency and expanding their business. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Companies were started off by a group a doctors, but later they were bought out. The main focus of health insurance companies changed into corporate money making. There are plenty of poor healthy people without insurance. They eat for nutrition and practice good living habbits. I like former Virginia governor Harry Byrd’s idea of pay as you go. Now we Americans are sold on credit cards, where we pay later and health insurance, where we pay in advance.

  8. jennifer says:

    The people who pay the penalty or “tax” are the ones who choose not to have insurance even though it is offered at a price that is reasonably affordable. They are the very same people who will end up in the hospital when some situation comes up that they can not afford to pay for out of pocket. The hospitals are obligated to treat them no matter if they can pay or not. Personally, I do not have a problem requiring them to pay a “tax” that insures me there is some money in the bank when they do go to the hospital. (that is unless the powers that be borrow from that fund like the governor of VA has with VRS, which was not his to borrow).

    • And what of the chiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiildren, Jennifer? The ones that can’t even pay back their student loans, much less buy health insurance.

      • Sam Card says:

        If you are a member of a federally approved Indian tribe, there is no penalty for being without health insurance. There is a federal Indian Health Service. However, there are many people who are of native American heritage, but not all are federally recognized. For others in 2014, the penalty per individual is $95. In 2015, the penalty is $325. In 2016, the penalty for being without health insurance is $695. There is no penalty, if unable to buy health insurance that costs less than 8% of your income. If you refuse to pay the penalty to the Internal Revenue Service, the Affordable Care Act prohibits the IRS from jailing you or seizing your property. Even if you are legally bankrupt, you are responsible for paying back your student loans plus interest.

  9. Another View says:

    First, it is not a tax. Second, no matter what the Supreme Court says, the federal government does not possess the power to tax you if you do not act as it wishes.

    The hospitals are obligated to treat sick uninsured people due to . . . the federal government! And not only is that law unconstitutional, but it creates the problem Obamacare pretends to fix!

    You want healthcare? Pay for it yourself!

    • Hmmm…Romney’s own words seem to counter your rant.

      http://news.yahoo.com/four-things-romney-wishes-hadnt-said-romneycare-164432757.html

      Hospitals treat uninsured sick people due to the Hippocratic Oath they all swear to when they become licensed phsyicians. The federal law makes it illegal for the bean-counters to say “Nyet!” to anyone. We who have insurance have been paying ofr this coverage for the poor for a long time. It’s just comically ironic to see the right wingnuts blowing up over something put forward by Obama and the Democrats that orginated within the Heritage Foundation, and uber-conservative group.

      • Another View says:

        The federal law does make it illegal to turn away the uninsured, but that law too is unconstitutional.

        I am glad you are finding “comic[]” relief in seeing our freedoms and liberties dissipated, as the Constitution is shredded by the Left.

  10. This was good news today. The conservatives are pissed off, and pissed off usually wins elections. This isn’t over not by a long shot.
    So let’s see Obama run for office in a recession after giving us the largest tax increase in world history, with another set of tax increases on the way.

    • http://news.yahoo.com/ruling-ups-support-obama-healthcare-still-unpopular-040755810.html

      Hmmm…seems some folks, including some Republicans, have come to support it. Even our own state senator, Jill Vogel, said (at the loca GOP soiree last week) that the law “is what it is, and we have to be practical.”

      There is a strong % of folks who like much of what is in the ACA. Granted, the political wrangling is far from over on this matter, but it’s interesting to see the shifts as folks take time to read the SCOTUS opinion, check out the law, etc. Ultimately, the election in november will give the American people the opportunity to weigh in – and that in and of itself is a beautiful thing we have here.

      • Another View says:

        Of course some people like parts of Obamacare. But then, some people are ignorant of the Constitution and our history. And other people love to have the government require others to pay for their goodies.

        • Sam Card says:

          Starting with former President Bill Clinton, the budget for the NIH (National Institute of Health) doubled from 1998-2003 to 30 billion dollars per year under George W. Bush. President Barack Obama added 10 billion dollars in federal stimulus funds to NIH from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

  11. My 2 Cents says:

    HA! Sarge and AV you lost today and will lose again in Nov!!!

    Can’t wait to read the Conservative Star tomorrow……

    • I’m sorry 2 cents, but it’s going to be a landslide against Obama, thanks to this ruling. This has done nothing but resurrect the Tea Party. You remember those guys, right? The ones that came into exisistance because of…………………………………ObamaTAXCare. The ones that sent all those liberal dems packing back in 2010.The ones that whacked the unions in Wisconsin this year?

      Obama can court all the stupid white liberals (which make up only around 20% of the country) and illegals and homosexuals he wants. Combined, it won’t be enough to stem the flow of regular Americans that will go to the polls in 129 days to get rid of this bunch of marxists.

      Doom is in the box

      • Mr Mister says:

        “Obama can court all the stupid white liberals (which make up only around 20% of the country)”

        + Judge Roberts.

      • smart white liberal says:

        [redacted] I don’t call conservatives stupid; I don’t call fanatics on either side stupid.

        But I do think you are incorrect in your November assumption

        • Mr Mister says:

          He continues to prove the point that the GOP and Tea Party are bullies! They are going to tell you how to think, what to do because they have all the answers. They pick and choose which part of the Bible and constitution they want to impose upon you. They also want taxes to go to projects that only benefit them, not the other colors of people, even though WE are all Americans.

          • Another View says:

            Who are the real bullies? The conservatives who want folks to be free to live as they wish? Or the Left who insists that they know better, and you will do as they say, or else?

          • Those “who insist that they know better” would certainly seem to include you and all of your smug, FFV, believe you are always right ego-centric rantings.

          • Another View says:

            Wrong! My advocacy is for individual freedom and liberty, for constitutional government and for the individual. You and your Leftists fellow travelers want to confiscate others’ wealth, dictate how folks use their own property, and command people on what they eat, buy, etc. No smoking! No trans fats! And marriage must be redefined to accommodate whoever is the flavor of the month.

            The Left is composed of society’s bullies.

          • EleanorDashwood says:

            I’m not against the rich, I’m against the rich hiding money in other countries to avoid paying taxes on it and using their wealth to gain an unfair advantage. I’m not against corporations, I’m against corporations governing us. I’m not against banks or investment markets, I’m against legalized fraud in the banks and on Wall Street. I’m not against democracy, I’m against the sale of influence by elected representatives and lastly I’m not pro-abortion but I feel no one should be told what they are allowed to do with their own body or how to live their life. If that makes me a Leftist then I’m proud to say that I am.

            GOP economics, the science of explaining tomorrow why the predictions you made yesterday didn’t come true today.

          • Of course you’re against the rich. If you think the rich should pick up any more of the tab for the 49% that already do not pay Federal income tax, then you are against the rich keeping the money they WORKED for.

            I will agree with you somewhat on corporations. Eisenhower said “Beware the military industrial complex”. I submit today we have a government/business complex, with the lapdog media thrown in for good measure.

            So tell me, what has Obama done about that in the last four years?

            Nothing

            And if banks are committing “legalized fraud” using current leagl laws and loopholes, what has Obama done about that?

            Nothing

            If you agree with the govenment forcing you to buy something or be taxed, then whether you realize it or not, you are against democracy

          • EleanorDashwood says:

            The GOP narrative, that Obama has raised taxes, when he has lowered them for all but those making more than 250k a year, that notion the he’s a muslim, the notion that obamacare means death panels, all lies. The idea that banks and big business, making record profits in 2011 and 12 and sitting on piles of cash, would hire more people if they somehow were sitting on even BIGGER piles of cash, is a lie. The reason that businesses hire people is because there’s demand for their products, and rising income inequality has been eroding demand for 30 years. We have had fake demand, in the form of speculative bubbles, for decades. Homes can’t be worth more than the salaries of those that live in them.
            By the way, if you are retired military you have Tricare (as I do), exactly how much have you paid for that insurance, Sarge? I know, but why don’t you tell everyone on here how much you pay out of YOUR pocket for your insurance?

            “Once your realize that trickle-down economics doesn’t work, you will see the excessive tax cuts for the rich for what they are – a simple upward distribution of income, rather than a way to make all of us richer, as we were told”
            – Ha Joon Chang
            Faculty of Economics
            Cambridge University

          • Hmmm…was it not “W” who said, “If you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists”? He of the self-proclaimed “compassionate conservative” moniker? Who boasted that, with his re-election, he had “gained some political capital” and was going to spend it boorishly? Who, aided by Karl Rove (a man with zero integrity who never met an out-of-context-sound-bite-to-tell-a-lie-with he didn’t like) and others, cowed opponents with the “you’re un-American if you oopse us” mantra?

            The Right has just as many bullies as the Left. The sad thing is that, for those like me who are in the middle, there really is nothing redeeming about either side. Petty political turf wars have caused us to forget the greater good. Washington would decry us all, but particularly those fools in DC and Richmond.

            As for your tired old uber-libertarian screed…you want to rally people to your cause? Stop with the anonymous postings, start a movement we can identify with, and plant your flag in the ground so folks know who they are working with. By your own words, we know you are a lawyer at a NoVA/DC-area law firm, you’ve worked (so you’ve said) on some high-profile cases (like the VMI business and this recent SCOTUS stuff)…all while hiding behind your anonymity and lacing your retorts with right boastful statements that your ancestors trace back to Jamestown, etc. FFV status don’t mean jack, except in certain narrow audiences.

            You rail about dispatching some 2/3 of the federal executive branch (Transportation, Education, Agriculture, Labor, Commerce, etc.), yet you offer not a whit of credible logic or answer to how you’d address the myriad agencies and departments and services that would be lost (NOAA, NHTSA, FDA, OSHA, NLRB, etc.) and the hundreds of thousands of folks thus laid off (and the thousands of ancilliary workers affected as the ripples of those layoffs impact support businesses and those communities, like NoVA and Leesburg and even here in Winchester).

            Our Constitutional government, as evidenced by this SCOTUS ruling, proves that – contrary to your rants – the system of checks and balances is indeed in place and working just fine. The SCOTUS reviewed the law presented to it, struck parts that weren’t up to Madison’s standard, and kept the rest. It was a 5-4 vote, reflecting the similar divisions within our own society. If you don’t like the ruling, that’s fine – that’s your opinion on the matter. But to use it to angrily cry out “Secede now!!!” is absolutely ridiculous and greatly reduces any sort of legit argument you may have hoped to make.

            But don’t let that stop you. You will continue, as the libertarian version of Donald Marro, and rest in your smug assumption that you are the smartest Stooge in the room, that the rest of us are mere Luddites who just don’t get it, and that you are never wrong. You and Sarge, go right ahead and spew your incendiary bile all you want.

            If there are flaws in the law, Congress has a chance to fix those flaws – IF they can turn OFF the stupid, mind-numbing political rancor, act like mature grownups, and actually hold a civil conversation.

          • life is good says:

            Very good points all around Tom, but you do realize you are talking to a brick wall here? And they almost, not quite, make Marro look halfway sane.

            People who do not agree with their rather skewed and flawed outlook (I daresay moderates, liberals, and perhaps some sane conservatives) are deemed stupid and sheeple.

            They resort to innuendos of the president being a muslim sympathizer, probably are birthers, and dispute his religion. Forgetting that whatever one in elected office is is not a concern, there is something called separation of church and state, but that is conveniently ignored. The government should not interfere, unless you happen to be a woman, or gay, then the gloves are off.

            In the “middle” that’s as bad as being liberal in minds like theirs. And you are right, there is nothing for us who don’t wholeheartedly approve of everything in this administration, but remember the last one as well…that one too is ignored.

            People like those can no longer think, but heap tirades upon rants, in kind of a pavlovian dog kind of way. If they say it enough, people will begin to believe it is true. Talk about sheeple!

            It is somehow wrong to be happy in general. That means you are stupid.

            There is just no point in responding. One is a retired person who apparently has no life, and the other is some “lawyer” who thinks he needs to spread his “word”, and to argue with him puts you in some kind of pen with other lower forms of life.

            It is sad that one can have no dissenting opinion without being given a label.

            Thankfully, they are not the majority, no matter what they think. And will be unhappier still come November.

            They are to be pitied. And ignored.

          • Come to the Dark Side LiG

            http://www.teaparty.org/about.php

            1. Illegal aliens are here illegally.

            2. Pro-domestic employment is indispensable.

            3. A strong military is essential.

            4. Special interests must be eliminated.

            5. Gun ownership is sacred.

            6. Government must be downsized.

            7. The national budget must be balanced.

            8. Deficit spending must end.

            9. Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal.

            10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must.

            11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory.

            12. Political offices must be available to average citizens.

            13. Intrusive government must be stopped.

            14. English as our core language is required.

            15. Traditional family values are encouraged.

          • Another View says:

            You may call names, but you have yet to offer any substantive reasoning for your “beliefs” LIG!

          • Wow, calling someone Donald Marro. Now that’s just downright low:)

          • Another View says:

            There is nothing Madisonian about the law or the decision. It is an unconstitutional law, and a sorry political decision.

            As for my solutions in replacing government eliminated programs? The private sector.

            Would a smaller government mean economic pain for some? Absolutely! But those folks have no claim on others’ monies; they will have to do something else.

          • EleanorDashwood says:

            “As for my solutions in replacing government eliminated programs? The private sector.” That would be inviting the wolf to watch the hen house. Case in point. Halliburton…does the name ring a bell?

            “The Halliburton story is the classic military-industrial revolving door tale. As Secretary of Defense under Bush I, Cheney paid Brown and Root services (now Kellogg Brown and Root) $3.9 million to report on how private companies could help the U.S. Army as Cheney cut hundreds of thousands of Army jobs. Then Brown and Root won a five-year contract providing logistics for the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers all over the globe. In 1995, Cheney became CEO and Halliburton jumped from 73rd to 18th on the Pentagon’s list of top contractors, benefiting from at least $3.8 billion in federal contracts and taxpayer-insured loans, according to the Center for Public Integrity.
            Even without the Cheney conflicts of interest, Halliburton should never have even been eligible to receive government contracts in the first place. This, after all, is a company that has been accused of cost overruns, tax avoidance, and cooking the books and has a history of doing business in countries like Iraq, Iran and Libya.” -CitizenWorks, Tools for Democracy

            Greed is what is killing democracy.

          • Would you like to know why the military ended up contracting everything out, Eleanor? As someone that was on active duty during the Klinton years, I’ll be happy to tell you. You see, while the civilian world was riding the .com bubble and life was pretty good economically, Klinton and ALGore were busy gutting the military. A lot of the balanced budget that came about back then were from Klinton defense cuts. Cuts that were made all the while increasing ops tempo over 300%, to include such pizza delevery missions as Bosnia and Haiti. Imagone that , a DEMOCRAT cutting the military. Happens EVERY time. Kinda like NOW.

            And since we were gutted so badly, we needed someone to take up the slack for all the service folks that were kicked out, so the military started to contract ceratain specialities that the military no longer had.

            Now, before I made senior NCO grades, I thought it was pretty stupid to pay someone a $100,000 a year to come and build say, a road. Or a chow hall. But when I got up to higher ranks, I realized it made sense.

            Yes, an Airman Basic makes maybe 20,000 a year, and it would seemingly be cheaper to use them. But, that same airman basic , by their mere presence, requires other suport personnel around him. He requires say, 1/4 of a person to be in the chow hall, at the clinic, at the supply depot and so on. Add those people up, plus the bennies the airman and all those other airmen gets during and after a possible career, and it turns out it is more cost effective to pay a civilian straight cash with no bennies and have the flexibilty to kick them to the curb when you are done.

            Brown and Root, at least from what I’ve seen, is a very effiecient company. My first experience with them was in Bosnia, where they came in and poured a concrete slab for our equipment and built a ranch house sized shelter for us and our other stuff in less than a week. Did the same thing with a chow hall. Used to be that military personnel would have done that, but if you’re not going to fund the military properly, this is the price you pay.

            Granted, that is micro, and I’m sure that one the macro scale they are like every other defense contractor and squeeze as much out of Uncle Sugar as they can.

            And as for AV’s solution, the private sector, that’s all well and fine. But when you only have one comapny willing to go get shot at, and only one company that bids on a contract, guess what? They can pretty much charge what they want.

          • John Ryanson says:

            The conservatives want folks to live as they wish? If I’m not mistaken (correct me if I’m wrong) it is the conservatives who attempted to force women to attain a transvaginal ultrasound if they wanted to attain an abortion? It is the conservatives who don’t want an adult woman to be able to make a choice to have an abortion in the first place (some even want to deny it in instances of rape and/or incest)? It is conservatives who want to dictate which two adults of legal age can or cannot get married? I could go on, but I have to get back to the tiresome work of insisting I know better.

      • Eleanor Dashwood says:

        Sorry Sarge, mathematically, your logic makes no sense. If what you say about the 20% is true, there must have been a lot of Republican’s that voted for Obama. I say fight them to the end, until the children of the poor eat better than the dogs of the rich.
        I find that debating most republicans is like playing chess with a pigeon. You can be the best chess player in the world but the pigeon is still going to knock all the pieces over, crap on the board and march around triumphantly.

        • My math is fine. A lot of republicans stayed home in 08. They ceratinly weren’t going to vote Obama and McCain wasn’t exactly Mr Excitement

          http://www.gallup.com/poll/148745/political-ideology-stable-conservatives-leading.aspx

          PRINCETON, NJ — Americans’ political ideology at the midyear point of 2011 looks similar to 2009 and 2010, with 41% self-identifying as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 21% as liberal.

          21%. That’s what’s known as a MINORITY. And Obama, between ignoring immigration laws and ObamaTAX Care, just pissed off a good majority of independents

          129 days

          • EleanorDashwood says:

            The gallup poll information you cited above was from August 1, 2011…almost a year ago. Here’s a link to today’s gallup poll that shows Obama’s approval at 48% versus Romney’s at 43%. I know you’re retired, Sarge but try to keep up with CURRENT affairs.

            http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx

          • I’m not interested in the Romney v Obama poll. The real poll will come in 129 days. I’m interested in how many people consider themselves liberals/moderate/conservative

            Two completely different subjects. I know you’re a democrat, but please try to keep up;)

          • Warren County Caucasian says:

            How about how many people consider themselves Americans? Quit pasting labels on anyone who disagrees with your limited world view.

        • The reason no one is hiring is because of the uncertainty associated with this issue. Companies were holding off until this decision, and are now just going to either wait for the lection, or God forbid, Obama wins reelection, wait until 2016, to hire again.

          Trust me when I say this, you want to see Romney win, and repeal this monstrosity.
          And Ellie, I have degrees from Columbia and GWU, and been a working proffesional for 30 years. The people you mock so readily are a lot closer to being correct than you are and a whole lot more neighborly as well.
          You can debate me any time you want, it would be like bringing a gun to a knife fight,

          • EleanorDashwood says:

            Are either of your degrees in political science or economics? I too have been a working professional for thirty years.
            Yesterday being Independence Day, I saw many quotes in the media by my great, great, great, great grandfather but I wonder why no one ever quotes this one.

            “Democracy… while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.” -John Adams

          • So now one needs a degree in economics to determine why companies arent investing? They arent investing because they don’t know what the NEXT great campaign obama is going to go on to save the world is going to be. They want to be ready to pay for Shangri-La.

            And mark my words. If this abomination is not repealed, All we will have in 10 years are health care cards telling you that you are covered and that hip replacement surgery you need will be replaced by some morphine and a you are SOL greeting card.
            And i will search you out to thank you personally.

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            The big corporations have money to burn and none of it trickles down past their CEO’s and their shareholders. “Quarterly revenue rose 1.5 percent to $127.4 billion.”, from yesterdays LA times on Exxon, their profit jumped 49%.

            Without the American public there would be no private enterprise, everything we purchase, EVERYTHING… supports the free market but they don’t support us. Romney, for obvious reasons is for big business, he would like to remove regulations that govern big business. We need to recognize that giving corporations so much power, is to give corporations control over our lives not for our well-being but for corporate profit, and not under the control of a government that we elect and can change but under the control of CEO’s we did not elect and cannot change.

            I would never threaten someone that holds different views than I, I believe in personal liberty and freedom of speech. That said, I address your imperceptibly veiled threat, Dave, “And i will search you out to thank you personally.” It’s hard to tell if you are speaking of ten years from now when you seem to think I might need hip surgery or after the election if Obama wins again.

          • Another View says:

            Business–big and small–provides products and services to the American public, and jobs for the American public.

            Business–big and small–is created by folks who take risks, work to make their ideas work, and invest capital and labor. Neither Government nor Barack Hussein Obama created any business.

            And the money does trickle down beyond the CEOs and the shareholders. American businesses are philanthropic, donating billions of dollars per year to charitable causes. American businesses make consumers’ lives better–but for Microsoft, you would not be typing your comments or reading this newspaper (and spare me the myth that the Government created the Internet; it did not). And American businesses employ millions of people, allowing them to support themselves and their families. Be it Merrill Lynch, Ford, Berryville Graphics, or the Red Apple, American business is vital to this country.

            Indeed, but for American business there would be no Government. If people do not work, they do not earn. If people do not earn, they do not pay taxes. If there are no tax dollars, there is no Government.

          • Right Winger says:

            Dang, is it “Elinor” or “Eleanor”. You getting your id’s mixed up? Maybe CRS has really taken hold.

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            Dear, dear, RW… You asked me this a week and a half ago on the Bike Virginia article and I answered fairly promptly.
            Anyone over forty suffers from some CRS, that is the nature of human dendrites but in this instance, the problem appears to be on your end.
            May I suggest supplements, DHEA, Gingko Biloba and at least 7 hours of sleep a night.

          • Alas, poor “Elinor”. Perhaps you just have too many identities to keep straight in your head. But, methinks that if you stuck to just one, this would be a VERY lonely place. Might I suggest farming for you?

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            RW, you do amuse me. I DO have many names… wife, mom, daughter, sister, aunt and friend. Thanks to the wonderful people in my life, I am never lonely and I would love to farm but without the acreage necessary to do so I must be content with a small, usually unkempt garden. I again thank you for your concern.
            At this point our patient moderator is wondering if I’m going to say anything pertinent to the article and readers are wondering if they have wandered onto a social network so I leave you with this… Dance like you have health insurance, love like you have a right to privacy and work like your tax money won’t be spent on corporate welfare.

    • Another View says:

      No. The country lost. The Republic lost. Freedom and liberty lost. The rule of law lost.

      The only winners are the takers–those who feed off of the labors of others–and their government masters who feed them crumbs in order to retain power.

      All hail the victors.

      • Sam Card says:

        Corporate America gives lavishly to government officials, elected representatives and the National Governors Association to gain access. Pharmacy benefit managers(PBM’s) can control the types of medicines patients buy, where they obtain them and manipulate their price. PBM’s are the powerful middlemen coordinating the cash flow between health insurance companies, drug manufacturers and retail drug stores. PBM’s make money and use a complex reimbursement formula. The combined profits of the three largest PBM’s grew from $4.116 billion in 2007 to $6.212 billion in 2011, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Between 2004 and 2008, PBM’s paid more than $371 million in settlements and fines for failures to meet ethical and safety standards. Due to lobbysits, PBM’s operate under few federal regulations.

      • John Ryanson says:

        “The only winners are the takers–those who feed off of the labors of others”

        So according to you, a 22 year old diagnosed with a brain tumor who is able to get the proper healthcare to fight on because he was able to stay on his parents health insurance while he was searching for a job after college is a lowlife “taker”? A 55 year old man with a pre-existing condition who worked hard for 30 years but was recently laid off, and can now attain affordable health insurance is a “taker”?

        Requiring healthcare companies to spend 80% of your premium on actual healthcare instead of CEO salaries means the “republic is lost”? If only Obama hadn’t appointed that raging liberal Roberts to the Supreme Court…oh wait.

        • ElinorDashwood says:

          You have made excellent points in all of your comments, Mr. Ryanson. Welcome to CDN.

        • Your points are valid, and these issues need to be dealt with. However, a blind man can see that Obamacare is ging to make matters worse. So your 22 year old with a brain tumor will die with a health care card in his hand, but not have the operation performed due to rationing.

        • Another View says:

          Yes. The federal government has the authority to do none of those things. And just because you can construct heart string tearing examples does not render it legitimate.

          After all, what if some homeless family needs a place to stay? Why should the federal government not require you to let them live in your house? No choice, no questions asked, just do it. After all, they’re homeless!

          How would you like it if the federal government required you to spend 80% of your income on something it determined?

          The federal government was never empowered to take care of individual needs.

  12. kellcsmith says:

    Let’s say I am the head of a household considering moving my family to Clarke County. Perhaps, I am a small business owner looking to relocate my business to Clarke.

    Let’s also assume I’ve heard great things about Clarke County: It’s bucolic; it has that small-town feel; it has a brand-new, beautiful high school; it’s safe; I can hike the Appalachian Trail; I can kayak the Shenandoah….

    I’ve checked out the schools, the crime rate, the real estate. IT SOUNDS PERFECT!!!

    I really have my hopes up, now. I believe I’ve found my nirvana. One thing left to do: subscribe to the local newspaper to get a better feel for the county’s culture: neighborliness, community, politics, governance, commerce, etc.

    Ah, unfortunately, the weekly, printed newspaper is no longer published. But (YAY!), there is now an online news source, The Clarke Daily News. So, nightly, I settle in to read the CDN…. I read an article about a couple who decides to try their hand at food-to-fork restaurant in the county seat. “This is great!,” I say to myself. Then, I read the Comments Section, and I am discouraged. There seems to be a good deal of gratuitous snarkiness going on.

    “Surely, this is an anomaly. I mean, I’ve heard so many wonderful things about Clarke County.”

    I read on.

    Ah, okay, here’s an article on the recent Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act. (I think, “The local, county news source reports on national news? That’s unusual. But never mind, kellcsmith, just keep reading.”) Then I read the Comments Section of this particular article, and I’m appalled. The comments aren’t just gratuitously snarky; they’re nasty and vitriolic.

    “Okay, this must be an aberration,” I say to myself. “I’ll go into the archives….”

    I find a series of articles on the building of that brand-new, gorgeous high school I mentioned previously. “YES!,” I think, hopefully. “Surely, this is a project all citizens can rally behind, even if they might not always agree on the process of building the school. YAY!” (I want so badly to like this county I am thinking of moving to.)

    But, then, I read the Comments Sections of the high school construction articles, and they are not only gratuitously snarky, nasty and vitriolic, they verge on being slanderous (at best) and silly (at worse).

    “Honey!,” I call to my significant other. “We are definitely not moving ourselves, our kids OR our business to Clarke County. What’s our second choice? Would you Google their news source for me?”

    XXXXXXX

    CDN, what, exactly, is your editorial threshold for maintaining thoughtful and civil discourse? Do you have an explicit standard?

    • 33 comments so far, most of the snarkyness is between a few folks going back and forth… You would really not move here because of snarkyness? Really?

      It is a beautiful community, it is a wonderful place to live.

      Folks disagreeing and such is part of life. Open communication helps us all. I am not far left or right. I think opinions on both sides have validity and am open to hearing them all. I do not agree with them all, but I think it is important and a huge benefit to have the freedom to be able to speak openly and not be censored so critically as you would suggest.

      • life is good says:

        snarky? good lord, read some of the comments in the bigger newspapers, now some of them are over the top 🙂

    • Freedom of speech.

      Stay away.

      I hear WV is a great place to live.

    • Another View says:

      Why don’t you move to Washington, D.C., where acrimony and snarkiness take on a whole new and enlarged meaning? Or Chicago, Philadelphia or Boston, where racism is involved in almost every issue? Or San Francisco, where if you are not a homosexual, or at least a promoter of homosexuality, you are a bigot. Oppose a tax increase? In these communities, you are either heartless, a racist or a homophobe.

      No. Please do not move to Clarke County, Virginia. Too mean.

    • Eleanor Dashwood says:

      “Without debate, without criticism no administration and no country can succeed and no republic can survive.”
      ― John F. Kennedy

    • Yeah, because I’m sure this doesn’t go on where you live

    • Yes, they do cater to the liberal mind here

      • Sam Card says:

        Drug companies spend a lot on nauseating television advertising to promote pills with their side effects. Reduce devastating marketing costs and allow doctors to take a holistic approach in prescribing medicine. GREED in the US health care system is the ubiquitous cancer and premiums from the individual mandate will feed that growing tumor.

  13. Mr Mister says:

    They SCOTUS got this one right. I am smiling from ear to ear. Judge Roberts is the man!

    • Another View says:

      The Supreme Court did not get this right. You may be smiling, but more likely than not, it is because ignorance is bliss. This decision was NOT based on the Constitution.

      • Sam Card says:

        In the 1886 case of Santa Clara County, California vs Southern Pacific Railroad, the US Supreme Court decided that a private corporation is like a person and is entitled to the legal rights and protections under the fourteenth amendment to the US Constitution. The doctrine of corporate personhood has contradiction. States charter corporations, which are then owned by their shareholders. The issue of argument was about taxation of railroad properties. The 2010 Supreme Court ruling in Citizens vs Federal Election Commission said that the first amendment, protecting freedom of speech, prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and unions. Companies involved with health care had deep pockets to buy influence.

  14. HL Mencken says:

    I am pleased that so many people here obviously vote. I myself, am a big fan of the First Amendment, ALL of it and the fact that Mitt is a non-Christian running for President of the United States and has such a show of support shows we’ve made great strides in religious tolerance in this country. Bravo! Although I admit I am a little surprised that the right-wing christians are ok with this but if he wins, it will be as ground-breaking as having our first African-American president was. So there are hopes that an American of Jewish faith, Muslim, Atheist or Wiccan may hope to one day hold office.

    • Well, we’ve already had our first muslim president. Might as well try a Mormon too

      • EleanorDashwood says:

        I thought you were moderately intelligent, Sarge…Obama is a protestant. I tire of the redundant, knee-jerk, republican reaction…truth be damned.

        • Another View says:

          What makes you think Obama believes in any God? He doesn’t attend Church as President, he misquotes and misconstrues Scripture, and he won’t even acknowledge the one Church in Chicago he attended.

          Seems like we might have our first atheist President.

        • OK,let me clarify. Muslim sympathizer president. Just about the same thing. And I’ll be happy to debate it with you

          • Mr Mister says:

            Because like previous articles, Sarge judges people by their last names.

          • No, I judge them by their actions. Perhaps you’d like me to list actions that led me to conclude Obama is a muslim sympathizer?

          • Mr Mister says:

            “Well, we’ve already had our first muslim president”

            Yeah and while you do that list why all Hispanics are illegal too. At least that what you said in previous comments. And please write Hussein a couple of times because we might get confused as to whom you are talking about.

          • Mr Mister says:

            Crickets

          • “Yeah and while you do that list why all Hispanics are illegal too. At least that what you said in previous comments.”

            FInd it and qoute it, because I never said that.

            I’ll be waiting

          • John Ryanson says:

            What does it mean for one to be a “Muslim sympathizer”? If it means he respects Muslims and attempts not to alienate them in the way past administrations have, I’d say he’s guilty as charged. If you want to fight terrorism you can try to catch all the angry bees as they fly out of the hive but you’re bound to miss some. If you really want to end it, you have to get to the root of the problem and attempt to make it so there are not angry bees to begin with. Inflammatory statements and incidents made for Al Quaeda recruiting posters (i.e. Abu Gharib) is not the way to do it.

            Ordering the mission to to kill Osama Bin Laden, systematically dismantling Al Quaeda through a series of unprecendented drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, ensuring Gaddafi was overthrown and put to death (without losing one American life) doesn’t sound like “Muslim sympathizing” to me.

  15. Sam Card says:

    Greedy health insurance companies wanted the individual mandate. I feel disgusted as they are laughing with glee from the terrible Supreme Court decision by Justice Roberts. The conservatives on the court had it right. The pharmaceutical industrial complex, with their highly influential lobbyists, love the idea of the USA being an overmedicated society. It is a tragedy, but many US citizens can’t afford the medicine that they desparately need to survive. Money driven medicine has made health care expensive in the USA. Doctors over-prescribe and over-test to avoid catastrophic mal practice lawsuits. There is some need for tort reform. Elaborate diagnostic techniques and the over use of fancy technology adds to the patient bill. US citizens already spend a higher percentage of their income on their health care than others in foreign countries. Some people travel overseas to get medical treatments or affordable dental care. The complexity of Obamacare will persuade many employers to not provide health insurance. I worry that administrative costs and excessive regulation in Obamacare will drive up health care prices. People should have freedom to choose their own doctor and health care solutions. People who are well should be left alone and the federal government is not our parent who must approve of the insurance policy that is bought. Some people may only want a catastrophic hospital policy, with no extra fluff. There are Amish, Christian Science believers and others who believe in good living habbits in maintaining wellness. Many people feel well and want to avoid medicine and their uncomfortable side effects. I know an 81 year old man who takes no medicine and feels great. The individual mandate is the federal government forcing its citizens into COERCIVE consumption.

    • Agree with every word you said. Plus,name me one goernmetn program that stays within it’s budget and/or never expands

      The answer – None. This is just another New Deal entitlement program. And it’ll end up doing the same things Social Security, Medicaid and all the others have done, which is to consume the countrys wealth

  16. Another View says:

    Must we be more concerned about one’s faith or race, than their competence? Because the obsession with Barack Hussein Obama’s race did us an ill turn by distracting from his lack of competence.

    • Jane Boyles says:

      It seems to me as if you might have an obsession with President Obama’s middle name.

      • Another View says:

        What is wrong with the President’s middle name?

        • Jane Boyles says:

          Nothing is wrong with the name “Hussein”. It means “good”.

          Perhaps it is because it is an Arabic name that you feel the need to keep repeating it.

    • John Ryanson says:

      Just curious…did you always refer to President Reagan as Ronald Wilson Reagan and Clinton as William Jefferson Clinton? Or are you just using Obama’s middle name because it sounds funny and “un-American” to you? Obama’s secret foreign-ness has caused him to do many un-American things such as ordering the strike on Bin Laden, and systematically dismantling Al Quaeda leadership.

  17. The days of free employer and union provided health insurance and retirement are over. Unfortunately, the government is now responsible for making sure affordable health care is available for all. As the middle class has declined in the last thirty years, so has union membership and support. Workers use to get their wage and benefit package first and the share holders received a dividend on what was left. Now the workers get what is left after the CEO and shareholders get theirs.

    This fundamental shift has us trying to rescue and rebuild the middle class and provide some basic security and fairness. Health care costs were rising at 14% per year before this law even passed which was unsustainable and hoping that insurance companies would simply stop raising premiums was unrealistic.

    I am glad we have a president who is willing to lead and fight this battle as opposed to the alternative who believes that all employers will do the right thing and take care of their workers. Those days are gone!

    • Then what he should have done, and what would have been logial, is to have concentrated on price controls. Instead, he chose to go this route and his insurance buddies got paid instead

    • Another View says:

      You want health care? You want health insurance? Then pay for it yourself!

      • I do pay for it. I pay $850.00 each month which is an $850.00 increase since I entered the work force .I’m sure some of our premium goes to cover the cost of care for the uninsured and to pay the shareholders but if we don’t exceed our coverage limit this year, I think we will be able to qualify for our next government hand-out next year….Medicare.

  18. Got-A-Dollar says:

    Get over it! Apparently our constitutional lawyer President knew what he was talking about. The other side was just as angry with the hi-jinx President Cheney and “W” pulled. We are still paying for their wars, I think that’s taxpayer money too!
    Virginia requires motorist to have auto insurance or pay an uninsured mot orist fee. Let’s take it to the Supreme Court and put a stop to that breach of our freedom!
    CDN, you need to get a grip on this bunch, you have given a platform to some people with strange ideas.

    CDN Editor: Congress shall make no law […] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.

    • Wagonman says:

      Comparing health insurance to auto insurance is bogus. You have auto ins. to cover the other person or auto in case you’re in an accident. If you drive without ins. you’re breaking the law. If you have no health ins. you’ve made a poor personal choice.

      • John Ryanson says:

        A poor personal choice that forces everyone else in society to pay your costs. That is where the individual mandate comes in…

        • Sam Card says:

          It is condescending and sanctimonious to say that not buying health insurance is a poor personal choice. It may be for some, but others may not see it that way. Every individual has their own unique circumstances and budget. RISK is a part of life. Obtaining student loans to pay for a college degree is a good choice for some, but not for others, who may end up in debt. You can’t defaut on a student loan, even if you are bankrupt. Many people consider cost / benefit ratio in their financial decision making. Some arrogant people have never done a honest day of arduous work in their life and many people don’t have a clue how a poor person on a limited budget survives.

        • Another View says:

          Have you never paid a medical bill out of pocket? Many people do just that, without the need or assistance of insurance.

          In other words, the lack of insurance does not necessarily equate to an inability to pay.

          • Sam Card says:

            Another View is absolutely correct in his previous comment. In Seattle, when I was in my early 20’s, I paid hundreds of dollars in cash to the University of Washington Dental School and received excellent work on my teeth. I have a gold filling that that has survived to this day. On Page 128 of the book “Berryville Celebrates 1798-1998”, Dr. Tom Iden wrote, “Patients were REQUIRED by health insurance companies to come to my Berryville office from as far away as Romney and Harpers Ferry in West Virginia and Luray and Leesburg in Virginia because I was their designated primary care physician.” It is absurd for insurance companies to make patients spend money to travel so far for medical care. Some people don’t own a car. Why can’t Leesburg patients CHOOSE to see a primary physician in Leesburg? With mandatory insurance, patients are not allowed to be resourceful in seeking out their own appropriate health care solutions.

    • Another View says:

      “Get over it” nothing. This threat to freedom and liberty must be fought until it is dead!

  19. Got-A-Dollar says:

    OK CDN, what makes you judge and jury on what to redact?
    Freedom of speech?

  20. None of this matters. President Romney will fix it

  21. Sam Card says:

    The name, Affordable Health Care Act, is absurd. There is NOTHING affordable about it. With Obamacare, health care inflation will continue to escalate up, up and away. Our federal government is in debt and has a huge budget deficit. Concentrating on price control would have been more effective. It is a shame that outrageous medical bills have caused many people to become bankrupt. and destitute.

  22. Confused says:

    I don’t have health insurance anymore and can’t get it on my current job. What should I do if I get injured or get a serious illness?

  23. Another View says:

    Isn’t that really for you to figure out for yourself? Seriously, do you think that it is someone else’s responsibility to take care of you? And if so, how do you feed yourself? Do you buy your own housing and clothing? And how did you find a job without government assistance?

    Your question is symptomatic of what our society has become; we are a nation of children looking to government and others to meet our basic needs. What we should be doing is taking care of ourselves.

  24. Confused says:

    I work as a construction laborer everday. As I read the comments here it is obvious most posters hold better jobs with benefits because they got a college degree with my tax money or were in the military with my tax money or retired from the government with my tax money and now if I were to need help too bad? God bless America !

  25. Another View says:

    Tax money should not be going to permit folks to obtain college degrees. Tax money should not be allowed to pay for lavish government pensions. Tax money is supposed to pay for our military–that is actually in the Constitution.

    But just because some tax monies are misspent does not mean that we should expand such extravagance.

    If you wish to improve your lot in life, you can. Lots of successful people began in humble circumstances. It is up to you. Good luck!

  26. Confused says:

    College loans backed by the Federal government $1trillion.. Mid East War Games $2 trillion plus follow on vertern expenses and contractors.. Heathcare industry $2.5 trillion , Federal civilian retirement cheap $90 billion, cost of a stamp and they lost $2 billion.. somehow my $12 / hour gets streached to provide you folks with services at a cost you are only willing to pay.

    • Another View says:

      There is too much spending, and all taxpayers are burdened. The answer is less spending, less taxes and less government.

      • Been there says:

        Another,

        You are so correct.

        It REALLY is my fault that my son’s father has not made contact with his family in 10 years.

        It REALLY is my fault that my son has AUTISM and needs around the clock care.

        It REALLY is my fault we have to rely on the government for a portion of is care.

        That said:

        I have a sneaky feeling about you and some Clarke County Karma commin’ your way:)

        • Another View says:

          Been there:

          It’s not your “fault” but it is your responsibility. Be a man, not a welfare case!

          • Mr Mister says:

            Because this lady has to be a man in your world? I am betting she was probably doing fine until the last president screwed up the economy for all of us. By last I mean your idol, Bush. I know I was doing great before he sank the ship.

          • Another View says:

            First, Bush is not my “idol”. Far from it.

            Second, the economy was fine until the Democrat Congress took over in 2007.

            Third, EVERYONE should be responsible for their own well being.

      • Been there says:

        Another,

        You are so correct.

        It REALLY is my fault that my son’s father has not made contact with his family in 10 years.

        It REALLY is my fault that my son has AUTISM and needs around the clock care.

        It REALLY is my fault we have to rely on the government for a portion of his care.

        That said:

        I have a sneaky feeling about you and some Clarke County Karma commin’ your way:)

        • Another View says:

          No one ever made anything of themselves by throwing a pity party and seeking to live off others’ wealth. BUCK UP!

  27. Shaun Broy says:

    CDN: The “SCOTUS” has never said anything about something called “Obamacare.” I believe the legislation is called the “Affordable Care Act.” Are you now an affiliate of “Fox News?”

  28. Sam Card says:

    The US Congress and influential lobbysists created the “Affordable Care Act”. After days of many closed door negotiating sessions, the US House of Representatives were able to barely pass it as a reconciliation bill and the US Senate voted to approve it in 2009. There were bargains and giveaways, such as the Nebraska Cornhusker and 2009 Louisiana Purchase deal to win Congressional votes. President Obama asked the US Congress to come up with a plan. Obama could have said that no bill is preferable to the that preposterous bill that he signed into law. I wonder if he actually read the details of the “Affordable Care Act” as it was over 1,000 pages long. There were not enough votes in Congress to overide a Presidential veto, however Obama chose to sign the law. During the 2009 summer, many people spoke out aggressively and loudly against the idea of the health care proposal at numerous town hall meetings. US citizens in 2008 and 2009 were very worried about the economy and unemployment. They were not begging for a new overall of health care law. Polls back then indicate that most people were opposed to the proposed Obamacare law. In the 2008 Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton said she wanted an individual mandate in proposed health care reform. In debates, Obama publically disagreed with her health care plan and he opposed the idea of Hillary’s individaul mandate. After getting elected, Obama changed his mind and later decided that he approved of the individual mandate.

  29. Well, well, well

    http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/30/wsj-chief-economist-75-of-obamacare-costs-will-fall-on-backs-of-those-making-less-than-120k-a-year/

    Imagine, adding people to insurance companies rolls makes THE PREMIUMS GO UP.

    Who’d a thunk? Ceraitnly not democrats

  30. Clarke County Caucasian says:

    AV, you keep using that word – unconstitutional. I get that you’re a lawyer and everything, still, “I don’t think that it means what you think it means.”

    The Affordable Health Care Act is constitutional. Not because President Obama thinks it is. Not because the Democratic Party thinks it is. But becasue the Supreme Court says it is.

    And more to the point, it is constitutional because Chief Justice John Roberts – who was appointed by two-term President George W Bush – voted in favor of the law’s constitutionality. Chief Justice John Roberts, who with a stroke of a pen could have thrown the whole bill out the window and handed the “left” a stunning black eye just prior to the November elections, said that the law is constitutional.

    Again, I’m not a lawyer, but what part of Justice Roberts’ opinion don’t you get?

    Yet you keep using the phrase “unconstitutional” for weeks, but now that you are proven to be wrong, you refuse to acknowledge your error in judgement based on words posted earlier by you on this website.

    It’s a little embarrasing to watch really.

    You loose more credibility with regard to your legal authority everytime you continue to reject the fact that the US Constitution has prevailed. In fact, it is the people who refuse to come together as Americans once such a decision has been made that do the greatest harm to our country.

    God bless this great country AV.

    • Another View says:

      I am not wrong nor am I embarrassed. Who is wrong–other than you–is Chief Justice Roberts and the four “liberal” justices. Obamacare is unconstitutional. It was unconstitutional before the Supreme Court spoke, and it remains unconstitutional afterwards. Hopefully it will be repealed in January.

      There is such a thing as tyranny by the Court, just as there is by any other branch of government. That is what is going on here, and has been since the late 1930s.

      It is the height of ignorance that one would wait for government to tell you that it can do what it purports to do [to you]. In the Founders’ Day, the common man read and understood the Constitution, and would never be fooled by such sophistry that came out of the Court last Thursday. If the comments on this thread are any indication, public schooling has caused a decline in knowledge and reasoning among the common man.

      I’ve read Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion and the Constitution. Only one of them can be correct. I choose the Constitution.

      I have lost no credibility, because you do not understand the law and our history. And you would not have agreed with me had the Chief Justice done the right thing. You are a partisan who loves big government and using other peoples’ wealth to benefit you.

      This “great country” is on the verge of collapse. Perhaps that would be the best thing. Secession may be the answer.

      • Another thought says:

        Perhaps you could tell us what the name of your new country will be. Maybe Elm Streetistan? Good luck with the foreign aid.

      • No, you just refuse to accept the fact that you are wrong. The way our system works is that, if a case is brought before the court and it agrees to hear it, it can render it supported (i.e. “Constitutional”) or not (i.e. “un-Constitutional”).

        Can decisions be flawed? Absodamnlutely they can (see “Keno” ruling). However, up to and until either a new law is passed repealing the ACA or a new case is brought before the SCOTUS and it reverses its earlier ruling, in the eyes of the law (you know, that career field in which you’ve apparently done well for yourself) the ACA has as much legal standing as the “Can’t pass a school bus when it’s lights are flashing” law immortalized on “Schoolhouse Rock.”

        • Another View says:

          First, you are referring to “Kelo”. That decision was not flawed, it was wrong.

          Second, just because the Supreme Court states that something is constitutional does not make it so. Obamacare is unconstitutional, and anyone who took the time to actually read the Constitution would know so.

          I am not wrong. And I refuse to fall into line just because so many find it convenient to obey their government masters. If the critics on this blog had lived in 1776, we would still be signing “God Save The Queen”!

          • Thanks for correcting the spelling error.

            As to the other point, you again ignore the facts of our laws – if a law, duly passed by Congress, signed into law by the President, and vetted as “Constitutional” by the SCOTUS upon a challenge in court is allowed to stand, then – in the eyes of the law we all abide by – it is the law of the land up to and until it is either repealed or scuttled by a subsequent court case.

            Your personal opinion is that it is “Unconstitutional,” and you base that on your reading of the Constitution. OK, fine, that’s your take. However, the take of 5 SCOTUS justices, including CJ John Roberts (who, I would imagine, have ALSO read the Constitution since it is, you know, part of their job description to interpret said document) came to a different decision and thus allowed much of the law to stand.

            The SCOTUS ruling sent this law back to Congress, and we the people who elect those clowns, to change it, scrap it, or let it stand as we see fit.

          • Another View says:

            It is not just my opinion that Obamacare is unconstitutional. It is a fact.

            Moreover, it is a fact recognized by thousands of lawyers and legal scholars across the country, as well as millions of citizens. Your view is the minority, and uninformed, view.

            There is no duty to enforce or abide by a patently unconstitutional law. We are citizens, not lemmings. Please act accordingly.

          • Roscoe Evans says:

            I guess you forgot the oath you swore the day you became a lawyer, and also the fact that you are an officer of the court, on and off-duty, every day of your life.

            Clearly, it’s more important to you that your family has been here for 400 years, that they fought to uphold slavery, and they tried their damndest to keep the common man down.

            You’ve told us for a year now that the Supremes would gut “Obamacare,” and you were wrong. Now, you carry on, saying that your reading of the Constitution is correct, theirs is incorrect, and we ought to join your seditionist plots. Well you can yap on from now until the end of time, and you still will be wrong.

            How about dumping the “Another View” internet personna, and stop trying to lead some of our more ignorant readers down the road of hysteria and treason? I.e.: Grow up. You lost the war. You’re going to lose every war. Except the war of cheap talk and sloganeering.

          • Another View says:

            I have forgotten nothing. What a silly cheap shot. What, no racism?

            Four justices would have thrown out the entire law. Had the Chief Justice not changed his vote, it would have been five, and Obamacare would be history. So I wouldn’t read me out of the mainstream just yet.

            As for the Chief Justice, it is he who forgot his oath, twisting himself and the law like a pretzel, just to avoid criticism from the Left. He is a disgrace, and should resign. Now.

          • It is not a “Fact” that you cling desperately to. It is your “personal belief.” They are two distinctly seperate things in this matter. Your belief is fueled by your reading of the Constitution, your understanding of said document, etc. Same for all of those other legal scholars – at the end of the day last week, it came down to 9 legal scholars who happen to sit on the highest bench in the land, and they used their understanding of the document, of legal precedents, of reading the law as it was presented to them, the arguments made for and against, other legal scholarship, and rendered a decision.

            While I have never taken a law class, I do have an advanced degree, reasonably high vocabulary level, and a pretty solid (imho) understanding of the terms in use 233 years ago. I can see where you get the impetus to pitch your tent as you do, but I have a different interpretation of things.

            The only “fact” here is that those 5 SCOTUS justices, including the CJ, read the same document you and I read, and deemed that – as it currently stands, it currently “stands” as law. I might not like speed limits, I might believe that they infringe on my ability to pursue happiness @ 90 MPH…but that does not change the “fact” that the law states, via a sign and a written addition to the legal code, what the posted speed limit is.

          • Another View says:

            It is not my personal belief, it is a fact. Read the Constitution. I am right, and the Supreme Court is wrong.

            Or do you think that the Supreme Court is infallible? In which case, are you still yearning for the return of Plessy v. Ferguson?

          • John Ryanson says:

            The 16th amendment to the Constitution allows the Government to levy an income tax. There are many people who do not agree with this and hence attempt to skirt their tax responsibilities. A handful of of lawyers and scholars agree with them.

            Does this make the income tax “unconstitutional” as well? I’d go out on a limb and say just because you and some lawyers do not agree with a decision, does not deem it ‘unconstitutional’.

            If you would read our founding documents you would see that there is a body called the “Supreme Court” that determines what is, and what is not, constitutional. In this case, that body has ruled that the Affordable Healthcare Act is indeed constitutional.

          • Another View says:

            The 16th Amendment is in the Constitution. The ability to command citizens to purchase a product is not. Neither is up for debate.

            And if you read the Constitution carefully, you will also find that there is nothing in there that gives the Supreme Court the final say on the Constitution. N O T H I N G.

  31. Loudoun County Caucasian says:

    CCC Well said except offering any credibility to AV assuming he is a lawyer only because he constantly uses the word “Constitution” a word over used by narrow minded one sided voters afraid of anything different than the little part of the world they happen to occupy.

    • Another View says:

      Well said by someone who apparently has never read the Constitution, and is clearly afraid by having to live by it. What is so one sided by wishing to abide by the rule of law? Does it make you a better person to be able to imagine flaunting the law? I don’t think so.

      The Constitution is a wonderful document. And if you find it inadequate, you can amend it. But to ignore it makes you lawless.

      • Warren County Caucasian says:

        You really didn’t respond to the points, so once again you have no argument except your same old nothing.

        • Another View says:

          I really did. You either don’t understand, or you do not like, my points.

          I notice that my critics wallow in invective and ridicule, rarely, if ever engaging me on substance. What are they afraid of?

          • Sam Card says:

            Another View is correct in saying that the ability to command citizens to purchase a product is not in the US Constitution. US Supreme Court Chief Justice was appointed by George W. Bush. The conservative justices viewed “Affordable Care Act” as unconstitutional. I was totally surprised that conservative Chief Justice Roberts took the side of the more liberal Supreme Court justices. I suspect that Roberts decided to compromise because he did not want the US Supreme Court to look partisan. Maybe Roberts feared a planned media backlash, if Obamacare was ruled out. I question the assumption that everybody is going to end up in the hospital, sometime in their adult life. It is true that most women now deliver their babies at the hospital. Years ago, midwives helped mothers give birth to their children at home. I suspect the American Medical Association did not appreciate midwives and wanted paternalistic doctors to deliver the babies. Hospitals were originally set up as a community service and not to make money.

  32. Loudoun County Caucasian says:

    AV you can’t be for real. Those guys in the black robes are not the headless horsemen from 1776. Tyrany then was a country call England? Fyi they have an embassy here now. The upgrades we enjoy if I understand you is better camo and tractors instead of mules. Hello it is 2012 the year the world ends? Have fun and remember to pay your taxes and vote like the rest of us. Obama would be a good choice for you and your beliefs.

  33. this and that says:

    Something had to be done about the rising costs of healthcare in the U.S. (all politicians agree)….. so now a start has been made to change a system that wasn’t working and it’s up to us to continue to follow the laws of the land – we have the freedom to agree, disagree, march, vote and change the laws if we so desire. In the meantime, it seems like it may be a good idea to give change a chance….

    Think about it– modernized countries across the globe have already figured out ways to meet the basic needs of their citizens – and Americans just go round and round instead of moving forward!

    This is BASIC folks!

    •Insurance companies no longer have unchecked power to cancel your policy, deny you coverage, or charge women more than men.
    •Soon, no American will ever again be denied care or charged more due to a pre-existing condition, like cancer or even asthma.
    •Preventive care will still be covered free of charge by insurance companies–including mammograms for women and wellness visits for seniors.
    •By August, millions of Americans will receive a rebate because their insurance company spent too much of their premium on administrative costs or CEO bonuses.
    •5.3 million seniors will continue to save $600 a year on their prescription drugs.
    •Efforts to strengthen and protect Medicare by cracking down on waste, fraud, and abuse will remain in place.
    •6.6 million young adults will still be able to stay on their family’s plan until they’re 26.
    A major impact of the Court’s decision is the 129 million people with pre-existing conditions and millions of middle class families who will have the security of affordable health coverage.

    We should also remember that under the recent ruling, having health insurance is and will continue to be a choice. If you can’t afford insurance or you’re a small business that wants to provide affordable insurance to your employees, you’ll get tax credits that make coverage affordable. But if you can afford insurance and you choose not to purchase it, the taxpayers will no longer subsidize your care for free.

    Guess we’ll have to wait and see. In the meantime, let’s MOVE ON!

    • Unfortuntely, there are no cost controls in this law. And to counter what you listed, there are going to be 100+ new agencies to “adminstrate” this monstrosity

      • Uncle Jessie says:

        “Sarge”
        Two sentences, two lies. That’s about par for the course for you.

        • Uncle Jesse,

          How does it feel to be uninformed about almost everything?

          GAO Confirms Skepticism About ObamaCare’s Health Care Cost Controls

          http://reason.com/blog/2012/04/03/gao-confirms-skepticism-about-obamacares

          The New Labyrinthine Bureaucracy of Obamacare (159 New Ones) to Streamline and Decrease Cost Of Healthcare

          • Tammy Lanham says:

            Uninformed? The problem is we are TOO “informed”! Or perhaps I should say “misinformed” by the crush of American media that intends to sway specific readers/viewers with OPINIONS instead of reporting FACTS. Of course FOX skews the numbers, and of course the liberals use social media networks like FACEBOOK to put a special spin on things. Many of us tend to gravitate toward the information that best supports our views…..

            But we are educated adults, right? Ask any first grader the difference between fact and opinion. It’s one the distinctions required in our public education system and one adults seem to have forgotten as we propagate SO much misinformation nowadays. Kind of like the game “telephone” but worse… as facts change through the “grapevine”… and before long we lose sense of where we started. American? Patriot? Loyal to country? neighbors?

            Here is a direct quote from the link above:

            ……….”this tells us is that if the (probably imaginary) savings in the health law don’t pay off, we’re scheduled to rack up a mountain of debt. There’s always been good reason to be skeptical of those savings, however, and the report provides no new reason to think that we’ll actually see any of the law’s alleged savings”

            Any news here? Fact? Or perhaps mere speculation??

            Or perhaps so much of what we read tends to obfuscate the issues with extraneous information?

            It’s everywhere! Here’s another example I just noticed on my facebook page this morning ~ Regarding Michele Bachmann’s comments on Piers Morgan Tonight…… mentioning a 3.8% ObamaCare tax on home sales as part of the health care plan… (she supposedly based this information on chain email source)

            Instead of believing all I read I took the time to research and discovered FORBES reported three months ago:

            (in April) “Forbes debunked this lie by writing, “Yes, the health law will impose a 3.8 percent tax on investment profits and other non-wage income starting in 2013. But that tax applies only to couples with adjusted gross income of $250,000 (or individuals with AGI of $200,000). About 95 percent of households make less than that, and will be exempt from the law no matter what. In addition, couples who sell a personal residence can exclude the first $500,000 in profit from tax ($250,000 for singles). That would be profit from a home sale, not proceeds. So a couple that bought a house for $100,000 and sold it for $599,000 would owe no tax, even under the health law. If that couple had AGI in excess of $250,000 and made a profit of $500,010, it would owe the new tax. On ten bucks. That would be an extra 38 cents.”

            —————

            Perhaps we should be a bit more objective.

            Perhaps the media is actually swayed by those in America who have a well-funded agenda…. and goals that are more monetary based than patriotic in nature.

            Perhaps we should wonder… what “reports” we should actually believe?

            Perhaps each of us should dig a little deeper before spouting off (I know, like who has time?)

            Or PERHAPS we could share our concerns in a creative manner instead of going around in circles, trust a bit more when it comes to democracy, our elected officials, and our supreme court… and believe we can be stronger as individuals who work toward unity on ANY cause. After all THAT is the American way.

          • Right Winger says:

            “…trust a bit more when it comes to democracy, our elected officials…”

            You couldn’t promise me enough gold to trust ANY elected official.

          • Another View says:

            The American way is to distrust government. The American way is to jealously love freedom and liberty, and to lash out at any encroachment.

            We are not the United States of America. We are Vichy France.

          • EleanorDashwood says:

            Sarge, you do realize that you are citing ‘blogs’ that are citing ‘tweets’, don’t you? You also understand that a ‘blog’ is a personal opinion, not necessarily based in fact, don’t you? That is like citing one of the comments on this article to back up an argument.

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            All that “confirms” is that you don’t realize that a blog reflects a personal opinion on an issue…only slightly less credible than Wikipedia, which even our children know not to cite as a reliable internet source.

    • donnajo frisbee says:

      you must be one of those government employees who gets free healthcare. gov. does not care how much it cost us. REPEAL OBAMACARE NOW!!!!!! I PAY ENOUGH TAXES!!!!!!!! the best thing that could happen to the American people is get rid of the OBAMAS.

  34. Another View says:

    Free men will not move on! Free men will oppose socialized medicine until their dying breath!

    Forget that the federal government does not have the authority to do what Obamacare purports to do. The laws of economics and free markets will prevent any of this pie in the sky “change” from occurring. Nothing is free. When you require preexisting conditions to be covered by insurance, the costs of insurance skyrockets for everyone! Preventive care will not be free–you will pay dearly for it. There will be no senior citizens saving money on their drug purchases; it will be paid for by others. And do you know why women are charged more for health insurance than men? BECAUSE THEY USE MORE MEDICAL SERVICES! Who is going to pay for that? Because it is most certainly not free.

    OBAMACARE MUST DIE!

  35. Patriot says:

    Oh quit the Patrick Henry act and move along to real problems we face as a nation.

    This issue not being the highest on the list.

    • Another View says:

      Your misnomer aside, I would suggest that the loss of freedom and liberty portended by an unresponsive and lawless tyrannical government is exactly our biggest problem, number 1 on the list. No Patriot would deny that that is true.

      • Patriot says:

        It is you “sir” who are less of a patriot than I vow I am. I’ll stack my patriotism against yours any day. You and your ilk wish to destroy, promote fear, and in fact, want lawlessness to reign. In promoting that, you’ll destroy yourselves. Have fun!

        • We already have lawlessness. Obama is not enforcing immigration law. He has flat out sadhe was going to ignore it

          125 days

          • Mr Mister says:

            Seems as though Bush didn’t do much about the border either, even after 9/11.

            Four more years!

          • I’m still waiting for you to post my quote where I said all Hispanics are illegal.

            Having trouble finding where I said that, are you?

        • Another View says:

          It is not patriotic to celebrate, much less tolerate, the trashing of the Constitution. That is what you have done. Stack away!

  36. Michele Worthing says:

    AV – you’d better calm down or you’re going to have a heart attack. Then you’d end up in the hospital and who would pay for that? Hope you have Medicare (I assume by your crankiness that you are a senior citizen..) ?

    • Another View says:

      I would pay for that. I do not, and never have, received any government assistance. Welfare is for serfs and slaves, not free men.

      • EleanorDashwood says:

        “If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don’t want to do it.”
        ― Stephen Colbert

        Go ahead AV, I know you will attack me for quoting Stephen Colbert. Just because you don’t like the source of the quote, doesn’t make the statement false.

        • I’d gladly help the poor if they are willing to help themselves as well. I believe it is better to teach a man to fish so he may eat forever, rathen than give him a fish and feed him for a day.

          Gee, who said that?

          • EleanorDashwood says:

            It is a Chinese proverb, many have used it but who actually said it is unknown.

        • Another View says:

          Jesus helped the poor. The Roman government did not.

          Jesus’s commandment is that private individuals to serve the needy. Jesus NEVER invoked government to do anything.

          My source is the Bible.

          • EleanorDashwood says:

            I hope you are saying your source is in the bible to support your above comment because the quote about teaching a man to fish is not.
            So you’re a christian republican? Please tell me more about how you plan to cut programs that feed the hungry and heal the sick…oh, that’s right, that is a PERSONAL choice. Have you ever been to the Statue of Liberty? I have and there is a quote I want to share.

            “Give me your tired, your poor,
            Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
            The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
            Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
            I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

            Boy howdy, musta been some bleeding heart liberal, democrat that wrote that, yessirree bob!

          • Another View says:

            The Statute of Liberty is not a founding document. The Statute of Liberty quote does not call for government action. And the Statute of Liberty was a gift from the socialist French. What’s your point?

          • Another View says:

            I am not a Republican. I am a Christian. And I do not support the confiscation of other peoples’ monies for redistribution and then pat myself on the back for being “charitable”.

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            “The marriage of Christianity to right-wing politics over the last 30 years has poisoned Christianity to the point where it is unrecognizable and has little, if anything to do with what Jesus taught. Disregard and contempt for the poor, sick and oppressed have become its hallmarks. Worship of possessions and power has become its focus. You can’t shake the devil’s hand and say you were only kidding.” –The Christian Left

          • Another View says:

            What a hateful, untrue, mean spirited quote. I do not know where, or if, you attend church, but if this is what you are learning, it is no wonder you are so angry.

            It is not un-Christian to oppose the State. It is not un-Christian to oppose Barack Hussein Obama’s redistributive socialist schemes. It is not un-Chrisitian to believe in personal responsibility for one’s self, family, neighbors and friends. And it is not un-Christian to decry the lack of morals and societal decay caused by government programs which encourage abortion, sloth, promiscuity, the break up of families, and the decline of the human spirit.

          • ElinorDashwood says:

            The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern. -Proverbs 29:7

            AV, you have made it abundantly clear where you stand on this issue, and it is not where Christ stood.

          • Another View says:

            To the contrary; I stand exactly where he commanded us to stand. And I don’t have to misapply Scripture to support my position.

            I defy you to find one Biblical passage where Christ implores government to act.

            You, like all good Leftists, misuse Scripture to advance your Big Government fascist goals. That is a grave sin.

          • Hmmm…this has taken an interesting turn.
            Religion was brought into the discussion so let’s talk.

            Proverbs is rich in wisdom but because it is written in convenient couplets they tend to be plucked out to support ideas they were not intended to support. The key word in the Proverb you reference is “justice.”

            What is justice? Is it based on laws? Are there then standards by which someone is found to be unjust?

            What happens today is this idea gets attached to “social justice.” This is dangerous because it introduces the idea of socialism, where everyone is ENTITLED to the same benefits from life regardless of how they work or conduct their own affairs. I don’t think it is “just” to enable destructive behavior by providing aid and support that the destructive behavior deprives an individual of. At the same time there are often victims of these types of behaviors (like the children of drug addicts for example) that are not responsible for the dire circumstances that another has put them into. Is that just? How should this be dealt with? Very complicated…

            I would contend that AV’s adherence to the law would qualify as justice BUT what is lacking in his discourse thus far is what God extends to us which is grace. Grace says you will not suffer what you deserve (which is determined by the law) and are offered something you did not earn. This was the core teaching of Christ but was applied first and foremost to our relationship with God. The Christian faith says salvation is not earned but is offered freely through the atonement of Christ on the cross. The followers of Christ are called to live out the grace they are beneficiaries of and extend grace to their fellow man wherever they can.

            This is not to say that anyone who is not a follower of Christ is incapable of grace, it is merely a response to your introduction of scriptures against someone who espouses Christian beliefs. It does however open the conversation to the idea of grace and what role it should play in a society.

            I would contend that the differences being expressed here are a result of adherence to either end of the “Law vs. Grace” argument and can only be reconciled when they both are included.

            It is a challenging proposition and requires heart and mind.

          • Patriot says:

            Ok, so the bible has entered here, and I for one don’t know where Christ stood. I can read the writings of the Apostles who tell us what Christ said. Did they quote him correctly? Did it get translated correctly? What would Jesus say today? What would Franklin and Jefferson say today? The FACT is no one knows.

            I do know that Jesus preached compassion and peace, I believe this firmly. But to take any quote and twist it the way you want, AV, is simply reprehensible, and to accuse
            “leftists” of doing this as typical behavior is lower than you’ve been before. It is the extreme right who started this bible thumping “contest” and ED’s response to you, I think, was right on.

            In any case, this discussion was about the SCOTUS and whether you agree or disagree, I think it is downright appalling to load the thread with “what Jesus thought” None of us really knows, and how he might think 2000 years later might be totally different. No human being has the authority to speak for Jesus Christ. Besides, the SCOTUS should not take religion into their decision.

            Mean spirited quote by ED, AV? She just was playing your hateful game.

            And I personally believe…based on his, or other’s, writings, that he would have very politely told you to leave the temple and take your nasty, vindictive, uncharitable, holier than thou attitude, with you.

        • Tammy Lanham says:

          Good quote:)

  37. Good morning Clarke Dems. Let’s look at our ObamaTAXcare term for the day

    “Quality Adjusted Life Years”

    Look it up

    Hope all you older libs and dems are paying attention now

  38. Traveler says:

    Miscellaneous responses to the endless comments above:

    – Neither side of the fence has a Presidential candidate that makes me excited to vote.

    – “Romneycare”, the Health Connector, is a continued success in Massachusetts, by the way.

    – Corporations are NOT people. Never have been, never will be.

    When their lobbyists sway politicians to act in support of stockholders, not the general public, I wonder if Democracy is nearly dead in this Nation.

    Why should I vote if the majority of politicians at the State and Federal level are corrupt anyway?

    It wouldn’t matter who was President because the Corporations call the shots.

    – When will the entire Commonwealth of Virginia ever pass the Equal Rights Amendment for women at a State level? 30 years and counting…

    • Another View says:

      Corporations are associations of people. Corporations act through people. People do not lose their rights because they choose to associate.

      Think about what you are writing. If people associated as corporations have no rights, then the government can take their property without compensation. The New York Times–a corporation–has no First Amendment rights to publish. A church body–usually a corporation–has no right to worship freely.

      Good Lord what people do not understand!

      • Roscoe Evans says:

        This isn’t just inadequate: it’s an incorrect statement of the rights of corporations in the U.S.

        These “views” all should come with caveats. “Although I am a lawyer, my views are not based on my law school education. Instead, they are based on the fact that my family has lived here for 400 years, and we have accumulated an assortment of irrational biases over that time. Nothing I say is an accurate statement on the law.”

        • Another View says:

          It is actually a correct statement. Perhaps if you studied a little law and a little history, you would have a better understanding of the point.

          As for your gratuitous insults and ignorant statements, why don’t you let me know when you have something substantive to contribute to the discussion. Like most Leftists, you only are able to demean that with which you disagree. You are wholly incapable of rational and substantive discourse.

          • Roscoe Evans says:

            Sorry, Bud, but you’re wrong about corporate law, and the reasons why corporations have certain rights. Heck, I haven’t taken corporate law in nearly 40 years, and I can see you know nothing.

            All you and Sarge (history’s lesser noncom) have going for you is your willingness (eagerness, actually), to resort to the cheap, ad hominem attack. “Leftist”? Is that supposed to hurt, injure, or slow me down? Why not call me an “undesirable” while you’re at it, because that, historically, is what your people call my people.

            Call me any name you like. I’ve heard them all.

            Just stop lying about the law, history and the Constitution.

            Hint: For those of you who look to this man for statements on the law, try Black’s Law Dictionary. It’s free and accurate. It’s 400 years old, too, but it’s biases and bigotries are all laid out, so you will know exactly what they are.

          • Roscoe, your constant fallback position of relying on race does not add to the discussion.

          • Another View says:

            I am not “lying” about the law. And if you think that a legal education can be obtained for free from a dictionary, you are way off base.

            Historically my people didn’t call your people anything. Because we don’t know you.

            But I do know who you are. You are an aider and abettor of government tyranny. You are a taker, because you feel owed something. And you are ignorant of everything that made this country great. How sad.

    • Being from The Bay State, i can report that Romneycare is a failure, as the legislature really had ists way with it up there. The average wait to get to see a new doctor in Massachusetts is now 60 days.

      Thanks

      • Sam Card says:

        I grew up in the Boston area and have relatives and friends who are extremely displeased with Romneycare and taxachusetts. Many former citizens of Massachusetts now reside in New Hampshire, where there is no state individual income tax and coersion to buy health insurance. Christian Science believers have their mother church in Boston and publish the Christian Science Monitor. Many members relocated to New Hampshire after the passing of Romneycare. Live free or die is the motto of liberty in New Hampshire.

  39. Another View says:

    For all the people on this blog who think my claims of federal tyranny are overblown:

    The US Fish & Wildlife Service has just forced Depoe Bay, Oregon to cancel its Independence Day fireworks display as they claim the noise disturbs some bird species.

    We cannot have fireworks displays to celebrate our Independence? Because of some birds? So sayeth thy tyrants in Washington, D.C.

    You’re right. I am wrong. No tyranny here.

  40. Roscoe Evans says:

    My freedom doesn’t depend on fireworks. Yours does?

    You may want to proffer an explanation for federal actions, instead of just pumping up hysterical headlines, because that’s what real lawyers do. Your continued efforts to mislead us here are demeaning.

  41. Roscoe Evans says:

    I get it. I just find it repugnant. And I dislike seeing you preach ignorance.

    Now, stop standing there like the proverbial naked emperor, and use your purported education to do some real public good for a change.

    • Patriot says:

      I don’t think he can, he is too busy posting his nonsense to do anything serious.

    • The best “public good” that anyone can do is to take care of themselves and their own and not be a burden on the rest of us. If we had more of that going around we would be better off.

    • Another View says:

      You should educate yourself before you make such silly accusations. And you don’t get it, because you hate freedom and liberty. You are willing to be a slave, and want others to pipe down lest you lose your goodies bought at the expense of others.

  42. Well looky here. Costing money already is it?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/03/efforts-to-implement-obamacare-law-raise-concerns-massive-government-expansion/

    “New agencies”. Seems I’ve heard that somewhere before. Oh yeah! I posted it yesterday

    And you’d better hope the guv doesn’t give into the Medicaid thing either. If he and other guvs do, they’ll have to raise property taxes to cover all the new people on the rolls

    Yippieeeeeeeeeeeeeee “Free” Health Care for eeeeeeeeeeeverybody! Freeeeeeeeeeeeee! Freeeeeeeeeeeeee!

    • Tammy Lanham says:

      Dear Sarge, you completely remind me of a close family member who also follows the doom and gloom of today’s America and has so little faith in our government.

      As I mentioned about 50 comments above… tendency of today’s media is to sway us with opinion-based articles… so easy to think ill of America with all the misinformation out there… just follow your own brand of poison.

      The link above is SO typical of FOX “News’ (forget actual fact-based NEWS). Even the headline just elicits fear: “Efforts to implement ObamaCare law raise concerns of massive government expansion”.

      I actually understand how you must think we’re all doomed. Some of us just prefer to follow political (and world events) with the knowledge that America is still a great country, and we want to help make it stronger instead of tearing institutions apart and spreading fear and “concern”.

      Personally I am more concerned with those who are perpetuating the sad notion our government is a total waste… and want to spread the fear and paranoia to their children.

      I completely agree with Patriot, in that we all ought to respect our Commander In Chief – both the office and the person, whoever he or she may be. We each have the right to vote, as well as the freedom to make a difference (on SO many levels, whether in our own small community or on a grander political scale). Another View definitely has another view, as is his (or her) right and that’s ok.

      Let’s just hope the leaders of our future (who happen to be children) do indeed receive a well-rounded education, are taught to study history objectively and learn the difference between fact and opinions! We MUST be careful not to interpret the written word simply to suit our own opinions- or be swayed by emotionally charged “news’ and recycled issues in the media.

      I have often wondered what our founding fathers would think about the political frenzy our modern media has perpetuated in so many ways… and if they would be satisfied with the way their governmental structure has endured for over two hundred years – and how it has served as a model for countries around the world.

      Democracy is the way to go. Freedom of speech is also important…. TJ would have been SO intrigued with the amount of information we have at our fingertips today. But he even in his time he also recognized you can’t believe everything you read….

      “Advertisements contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper”.
      Thomas Jefferson

      • Well, you see Tammy, i don’t quite have the faith in government that you apparently do. I’ve asked several times in this thread for anyone to show me a government program that has not expanded over the years or that has stayed in budget. NO ONE has been able to produce an answer.

        And I find it amusing that you quote Jefferson and use him in your support support of large government. Thomas Jefferson was an anti Federalist, meaning he prefered state government over a central federal government. Frankly, Thomas Jefferson would **** himself if he saw the size and scope of the Federal government today.

        Oh, and speaking of reading, I surf all kinds of sites, from the left wing MSDNC and Huffington Post to Drudge and other right wing sites

        Look what I found today.

        http://start.umd.edu/start/publications/research_briefs/LaFree_Bersani_HotSpotsOfUSTerrorism.pdf

        SPeaking of government waste and overreach. Seems my self and several others here are considered “extreme right wing terrorists” by the Obama hacks. Funny, they won’t apply the word “terrorist” to actual arab terrorists, but they have no problem applying it to veterans and others Americans. Funny too that they consider such characteristics as

        “believing that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent” and “nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation), anti-global, suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty, and believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty.

        Like I said, too much government.

  43. Another View says:

    Today my children and I will read the Declaration of Independence. We will read it to remember the tyranny visited upon us by the King of England. And we will read it to recognize the tyranny that our federal government visits upon us today, especially since the inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama. We will remember that freedom is not free, and that every American must jealously guard and defend their liberties, lest they be lost to neglect.

    Since the 1930s, we as a society have been very neglectful, and lost a lot of freedom. I pray that my children will see it restored.

    Happy Independence Day.

    • Another Patriot says:

      And then hopefully your children will go to school and will study the revolutionary period, and the constitutional debate that followed 4 years after with the new plan of government. (Which by the way, No: most common men could not interpret the Constitution at that time, hence the writing of the Federalist papers in order to explain the various elements and intentions of the new plan, aside from swaying New Yorkers to support it)
      After studying this history on their own, perhaps, just maybe, your children will sense your lies and extreme, ridiculous, twisted, unpatriotic, and seditious views that you have used to twist our founding documents, founding fathers intentions, and founding institutions. Then, hopefully they will resent the falsehoods that you preached to them and wish that you had allowed them to be more open minded, and in retaliation and after years of therapy, they will be on the direct opposite side of this debate just to spite you and try to recover from their ingrained skewed perceptions.

      And btw: The Constitution is a living document, it is not perfect, neither is the Supreme Court, but it has allowed us to grow and evolve as a nation, and that I think is what you are scared of: its flexibility, for it has left you standing all alone.

      Happy Fourth Clarke County!

      • Another View says:

        The common man could easily understand the Constitution in 1789. At that time, all men distrusted strong central government, and The Federalist Papers were written to persuade and to assuage fears of the establishment of the federal government. And the contents of The Federalist Papers stand in stark contrast to what our federal government has become.

        I have told no lies, and twisted no truths. My children are educated and think for themselves. They are not lemmings who can be purchased with the promise of Social Security, Obamacare or EBT cards. Rather my children strive to be independent, and a charge and burden to no man or institution.

        The Constitution is not a “living” document; indeed, to state that it is is to state that there is no Constitution nor rule of law, but only the rule of men. If the Constitution needs to be changed, it is to be done by amendment, not by court ruling, or nefarious legislation.

        I stand not alone. I stand on the shoulders of Giants, the Founders, who created a government that was to be modest and restrained, not a dictatorial tyranny involved in our daily lives.

        But even if I did stand alone, I would rather do so than be a mere sheep, begging the government for my subsistence. You fear my words because you would rather trade you freedoms for crumbs off the government table. Your choice is disgraceful and will lead you to continued enslavement.

        Your hateful sentiments harm me not. Your kind are to be pitied, as you will be the first led to slaughter.

        • But, AV, the very process of amending the document means that it is a living document – one that can adapt to a changing world through a very careful and well-thought-out process. If the Framers like Mr. Madison had not included such a mechanism, then the document would have become staid and archaic and a rigid hindrance to progress and new developments that weren’t even a dream in Ben Franklin’s considerable eye in 1787.

          • Another View says:

            The problem is that, beginning in the 30s, the courts began “amending” the Constitution by decisions. Then Congress got into the act. So now we do not have the Constitution as written. Instead we have the rule of man, tyranny and lawlessness.

          • You confuse “amending” with “interpreting” the document. You decry a lot of government programs as “unconstitutional” in the absence of ANY court case with which they were so monickered. Again, up to and until a court case results in such a program being labeled “unconstitutional,” your personal feelings on the matter remain precisely that – personal feelings.

          • Another View says:

            I am not confused, and you are W R O N G! If you read the Constitution, you will know that the Supreme Court is neither the sole nor final word on a law’s constitutional validity.

            I have not offered my “personal feelings”; rather I have offered factual and legal analysis.

    • Doleslaw says:

      Well I am going to Walmart to buy a patriotic shirt that was made in China

      Then I will spend my monthly allotment of EBT; on fancy stuff like steak and lobster

      Go to 7-11 for my hot dog.

      Come home. Kneel and pray to my messiah BHO, and stick one in there for Bo the dog as well

      Take a nap. Dream of Lemmings and Sheep.

      Make a lobster roll…maybe two got to share with the undesirables and legals, maybe another one for the liberals. But wait, they are all the same.

      Feed my lemmings and sheep

      Prepare for work tommorrow….(sheep maid)

  44. Patriot says:

    Today I and my grandchildren will find a shady spot and I will give them the discussion my mom gave me when we were in the heat helping with the Richard Nixon campaign:

    Remember, people may have different opinions than ours. That is what this country is all about, it’s called freedom. When people disagree with us, be polite, smile, and never insult someone with a different opinion. Many people do not like Mr. Nixon and that is their right as Americans.

    No matter who the president is, he is the commander in chief. The office and the person deserve our respect. Petty insults destroy the office, and ultimately can destroy our country. Always remember that the president was elected by the majority; respect that decision and work to change it if you wish. That is your right and duty. But if you demean, belittle, and insult those with differing opinions, it is you who will lose credibility.

    The most patriotic duty you have is to vote! That is your voice. Every single elected office deserves your vote. Otherwise you have no voice. It is no person’s business for whom you vote. But you must do it!

    Beware the extremes of any political party. Seek the middle where compromise can be found. Extreme anything is ultimately harmful to our freedom. The extreme wings do not want to discuss, they want to tear down under the guise of building up. You will find extremists resort to unfounded insults and accusations. Walk away, for to listen is to give them credibility.

    Then we’ll have our picnic, watch the fireworks, and glory in this country and all the freedom we do have, whether people realize it or not. Then we’ll watch “Independence Day” when people came together to defeat the enemy……and I will wait for my favorite scene “Welcome to Earth (sock, pow) by Will Smith

    “There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America.” ~William J. Clinton

    • Another View says:

      Quoting an impeached President who disgraced his office by lying, committing perjury, obstruction of justice, and using White House personnel as his personal paramours. Perfect. Just perfect.

      • Sam Card says:

        Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace as US President for obstructing justice and his role in the Watergate cover-up. Read the “Outlook” section of Sunday, June 10, 2012 Washington Post. “The 5 Wars of Watergate” by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward is quite descriptive. See the movie “All The Presidents Men”. White House Chief of Staff Halderman testified in court that Attorney General John Mitchell had come up with a plan for the CIA to claim national security secrets would be compromised if the FBI did not halt its Watergate investigation. White House tape recordings were damaging to Richard Nixon. Read “Kent State, What Happened and Why” by James Michener. Do you remember hearing Neil Young’s song about “FOUR DEAD in Ohio” ? Unarmed anti-war STUDENT protesters were shot by the Ohio National Guard at Kent State University on May 4, 1970. President Nixon also considered a proposal for top level federal imposed reform of health care.

  45. oldfashioned says:

    Wow, reading the constitution and a lecture on politics. Ermmmm poor kids

    We’re hanging and cookin dawgs on the grill, some jammin, and our own neighborhood (legal) fireworks with hose on standby.

  46. Another View says:

    “. . . all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”

    Thomas Jefferson (July 4, 1776)

    I submit that it is our right and our duty to throw off the despotic boot of the federal tyranny and establish a new government, more suitable to the rights and lives of free men. May God look favorably on such an undertaking.

    • So…the reason you hide behind your anonymous moniker is why, exactly? If you feel so strongly…come out of hiding, plant your flag in the ground, name yourself and your group publicly, and see who joins your call for such a revolution. If you’re so not in the minority, why the secrecy of the screenname and all that? (Perhaps, though, you don’t want to deal with the ridicule and the potential loss of considerable swag from your law firm if they knew who you were?)

      You are earnest, I’ll give you that. But, your repeated rants and denials of things ruled Constitutional and trite dismissals of anyone and everyone who deigns to differ from your personal point of view only distract from anything cogent you might have offered up. You have tossed about Gadsden’s Snake so much that the poor viper has no strength or venom left in it.

  47. Happy 4th of July. Still are the greatest country to live in. Be careful of the heat and drink lots of fluids. Go to the Clarke County Fairgrounds tonight to watch the fireworks. It is a free and lovely show.Stand proud as an American citizen. Be thankful for “freedom of speech” without that freedom we would not have the right to make our feelings known. Not all the comments are sweet and nice but I for one am glad that we can debate Obamacare. Lots of learning and teaching with comments.

  48. EleanorDashwood says:

    This comment should have been further up in response to Sarge. We have obviously reached the limit of comments in that thread.
    Your comment is interesting to say the least. My husband was also in Bosnia in 1997. While in Bosnia they were fed by Army cooks that were there, doing their jobs (my husband is Army Infantry). This was the last year of Clinton’s term. By the time he went to Afghanistan, they were using vouchers for food because it was being subcontracted. Each meal, a soldier signed a voucher equal to $20 and picked up a plate. The sad thing is that if a soldier wanted seconds he was not allowed to use the same plate, he had to sign another voucher and get another plate. He was there for 18 months… three meals a day… each soldier. I’m not going to do the math for you but if I had to feed our family in this way, we would be in debt also. Who held the contract for feeding the soldiers? Halliburton… and you must not have read the whole quote, they were not the only ones to bid on the contracts, Cheney was still receiving bonus’s from Halliburton. The conflict of interest should have been obvious to the ‘commander in chief’ but so should a lot of things.
    My husband is a senior NCO and he is presently in one of the ‘stan’s’, and I will tell you that he and I are politically like minded. You never answered my insurance question, how much have you paid for your Tricare insurance over the years?

    • Um, 2000 was Klintons last year in office. So your husband, in Bosnia in 97, would have been being fed by Haliburton under the Klinton adminstration. So you say Klinton hired Halliburton huh? Wonder why?

      And since Cheney had yet to become VP, he had no conflict of interest.

      Good try though

      Oh, and you know what the TRICARE rates are like. Or you will when your husband retires. It’s one of the bennies they use to make up for the crappy pay the military pays you over the years. Funny thing is thought, retired servicemens medical was also quoted as being “free” when I enlisted, now we pay TRICARE premiums. Granted, it’s not much, but it’s not “free” like the government promised. And that happened under Klinton as well. Just another democrat biting away at the military

      Oh, and t’ell your husband not to get a job that pays too much when he retires either. If that happens and Obama has his way, you all will be paying even more for insurance and presciptions

      Funny, none of those increases happened on republicans watch. Hmmmmmm

      And dems wonder why the military hates democrats

      • EleanorDashwood says:

        You are wrong, Sarge. I said that while my husband was in Bosnia, he was fed by the Army cooks, as it was their job and it wasn’t subcontracted out and YES it was during Clinton. I said he was fed by Halliburton during the Afghanistan deployment.
        Please try to read more carefully as you appear to be twisting my words.

        About Tricare, ” …but it’s not “free” like the government promised.” You are mad that you have to pay a small premium to maintain your Tricare benefits after an entire military career of getting it free as a benefit of your job…yet to hell with all those that can’t afford insurance.
        Pigeons.

        • Another View says:

          There is a BIG difference between Sarge earning his benefits by serving in the military, and the federal government providing monies to those who have not earned them. B I G D I F F E R E N C E!

        • You also said 97 was “The last year of Klintons term” . It was not. That was 2000. Trust me, everyone in the military knew when he was heading out the door. Hell, I know Sr NCO’s that waited him out so as to not have the draft dodgers signature on their retirement certificate

          And yes, I am mad that I have to pay insurance premiums when the government said my health insurance would be “free”. I remember like it was yesterday, sitting in the recruiters office and SSgt Fawcett said, among other things “and the military will take care of you and your family for free for the rest of your life”. Now, that’s not something I was too concerned about back then because I was 19 and had no family. But the words are still with me to this day.

          It strikes me as odd you, being a military dependant, compare “free” military health care to other civilians that are uninsured. Needless to say, it is part of the mission and national security to ensure sure that all active duty service members are in peak health. As it stands, I myself have four years left on an inactive ready reserve commitment.

          However, the health care of retirees is a benefit that was promised by teh government. You should know this. Again, it’s part of the “compensation package” along with discount prices at the commisary and no tax on items at the BX, among others. In exchange for those “bennies” you swear to Uncle Sugar to work really long hours in some instances (until the mission is done) for crappy pay. You agree that Uncle Sugar can send you to far away lands away from your family for extended periods. You agree to shoot at who Uncle Sugar tells you to shoot at and agree to be shot at by said hadjis or whoever. You agree to sign over to Uncle Sugar your youth and in some cases the best years of your life. Or in other cases your life…..period. These are things you are expected to do.

          I haven’t seen any of teh welfare bums or illegals who expect their handouts agree to those terms

          Frankly, I have little concern for people with no insurance. Yes, some people have encountered genuenly hard circumstances, but everyone of them (Unless they are physically disabled) at least had the same opportunity that I did in joining the military. Perhaps they should have done so.

          I met an outstanding young man of 17 last weekend that had a plan for the whole first part of his life already laid out. He has already joined the Corps. He is going into diplomatic security so as to, among other things, get his TS clearance for future employment with the CIA or the FBI. When he leaves the Corps (or “corpse” as Obama calls it) he is going to use his GI Bill to get his degree. Then he is going to go to work.

          Think that kid will ever be without health care? No, because he is being proactive in life and planning for an adulthood where he will not have to depend on others for his exisitence

          Perhaps if more people, and especially kids, thought this way and took personal repsonsibilty for themselves, we wouldn’t be having this conversation

          Oh, and speaking of TRICARE, better hope this plan doesn’t get implemented. There are plans afoot in the Obama adminstration to do away with TRICARE and put all military on ObamaTAX care.

          Nice huh?

    • Please let us know how we can send support and care packages to your husband who is fighting overseas. We’d love to do our part supporting our troops. What’s his name and what branch of service is he in?

      • EleanorDashwood says:

        My husband isn’t on a deployment this time, RW, I believe it is considered a mission as it is only several weeks and not months that he will be away. He is a Sargent First Class, Battalion Operations NCOIC for an Army Infantry unit, I’m not really comfortable being more specific on a public site but thank you kindly for the offer.

        • HL Mencken says:

          How nice of all these people that feel the need to thumbs down a perfectly open statement about your husband. I see no reason it should draw ire but I believe you have rankled certain individuals on this site.

          “You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.”
          -Winston Churchill

          Continue to stand up for yourself, your beliefs and your husband.

  49. Shaun Broy says:

    Wow.

    The truth is that in the end… the final decision on the future of this legislation has NOT been made with this decision by the highest court in the land.

    The final decision shall ultimately be determined by “WE THE PEOPLE” on November 6, 2012.

    This is the very foundation of what our country is built upon…

    V-O-T-E!!!

  50. We Da People says:

    We Da People should we be Christians or Mormons? Just one of those founding fathers ideas for November 6th? Vaid if inagurated swearing into office with your hand on the book of Mormon? Could be one of those constitutional issues?

    • Tony Reynolds says:

      We Da People can be ANY religion we choose – there are several hundred worldwide. Or, we can elect to be spiritual with a devotion to a personal diety without a structured religion – or we can choose to be none of the above. It doesn’t matter – all are interesting opinions. And only opinions. No one religion or faith can make a claim for being any more valid than another – even though all try – and some will kill you for converting to another. Our founding fathers believed this and put protections for different beliefs into the Constitutuion. If Tom Cruise (Scientologist) got elected President he could be sworn in on a copy of Battlestar Galactica. Many citizens of other faiths would go slightly crazy at that but the Constitution was designed to protect everyone from intolerance. Keith Ellison, a muslim, was sworn in on a Koran that was owned by Thomas Jefferson and that was noble – but many to whom the Constitution is an inconvenience complained. Everybody take a deep breath.

    • Sam Card says:

      Thomas Jefferson would be pleased that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, a mormon, are the leading candidates to be our next US President. Jefferson had slaves working at his Monticello estate in Charlottesville, Virginia, but wrote “All men are created equal” in the Declaration of Independence. He understood and wrote about the tyranny of slavery and advocated for religious freedom. Brigham Young led persecuted mormons to spanish territory, which later became the state of Utah. Health care has improved since the struggle at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, where George Washington had small pox innoculations for his brave Revolutionary War soldiers. Necessity is the mother of invention and you can learn about Civil War medicine at the museum in Frederick, Maryland. Clara Barton started the American Red Cross and now we use ambulances and emergency medical technicians to provide first aid. Aspirin, penicillin and polio vaccines have saved many lives. Improved sanitation has reduced our infant mortality rate. HUGE DEBT is undermining our future stability of our great country. General Dwight Eisenhower led the World War II D- Day invasion to liberate Normandy, France. As US president, he warned us of the growing influence of the military industrial complex on government. The federal budget should reflect our values. We spend more on our military than all the rest of the world combined. Our Homeland Security budget is enormous and yet we feel insecure and the media feeds our fear. Improving access to adequate health care would make US citizens feel more secure.

  51. Sam Card says:

    Earlier this week, senior advisor Eric Fehrnstrom said Romney viewed the individual mandate as a penalty, a fee or fine. Now Romney says that Obama’s health insurance requirement is a tax. Right after the Supreme Court decision was revealed, Romney made a speech that he would appeal Obamacare on day one if he is elected US President. Romney is very inconsistent and will say most anything to win. Willard Mitt Romney comes across as the rich slick salesman, that you can not trust. The health care law that Romney signed in 2006, has an individual mandate and became a blueprint for Obamacare. Will uninsured citizens in Massachusetts have to pay TWO PENALTIES on Massachusetts state income tax and to the IRS for the federal tax fine? In Boston, patriots were upset about British taxation. People did not like taxation without representation. People opposed the Stamp Act and there was the Boston Tea Party. Romney has spent much of his Presidential campaiign shying away from talking about his Romneycare in Massachusetts.

    • Romney’s explanation of Fehrnstorms’ gaffe was extremly plausible. ROmney can support the Court’s decision and his own view of MassCare at the same time. They are different animals.

      • Sam Card says:

        Read “Money Driven Medicine: the real reason healthcare costs so much” by Maggie Mahar. President Richard Nixon signed the Health Maintenance Organizations Act in 1973. Dr. Tom Iden of Berryville, Virginia wrote, “HMO’s are cumbersome and inefficient for the physicians, besides being less responsive to patient needs”. There are four times as many health care lobbyists as there are members of US Congress. Former US Senators Hillary Clinton and Rick Santorum were the highest recipients of health care industry donations. To pass Medicare Part D, the health care industry gave 17 million dollars to the elected officials who negotiated the bill. Medicare Part D hands over billions of tax payer dollars to growing profitable pharmacy benefit managers (PBM’s) and drug companies. US Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts wanted national health insurance and Ronald Reagan warned about the loss of personal freedom in socialized medicine. In 2007, Michaeal Moore’s movie SICKO shows a view of health care in Canada, Cuba, France, Great Britain and the USA.

        • Sam Card says:

          When I was 11 years old, my mother almost died from a terrible car accident on US route 340 between Waterloo and White Post. She was in a coma at Winchester Hospital, but she was fortunate that her employer provided health insurance paid the bills. I am eternally grateful to Ann Wisecarver for her extraordinary nursing care. Ann’s encouragement gave my mother a will to live, despite a crushed body of many broken bones and intense pain. The recent evil Colorado shooting tragedy reminds us of uncertainty in life. Surviving victims will have expensive medical bills. Nearly one in three residents of Colorado (1.5 million) has inadequate or no health insurance. From their expansion of Medicaid, New England Journal of Medicine reported a 6 percent drop in the death rates in Arizona, Maine and New York.

  52. Another View says:

    Patriot:

    I did not interject or misquote the Bible. ED did. And I do know what Christ, Jefferson and Franklin said, and would say, based on the historical record. I do not need to twist anything, as I have history and facts on my side. Unlike the fascist Left.

    • Patriot says:

      I would submit that you sir, are the fascist if you need to resort to giving labels.

      But I don’t think what I say has any meaning for you. Go ahead, call me a sheep or whatever. You only want to destroy this country. I think that is not Christian, nor what the founding fathers would have wanted, but that is only my opinion, not fact as you spew.

      And you did quote or read the bible to us all.

      • Another View says:

        Fascism advocates a state-controlled and regulated mixed economy; the principal economic goal of fascism is to achieve national autarky to secure national independence, through protectionist and interventionist economic policies. It promotes the use and primacy of regulated private enterprise and private property contingent upon service to the nation, but where private enterprise and private property are failing, inefficient, or unable to fulfill fascist goals, it supports the use of state enterprise and state property in those circumstances. At the same time, fascists are hostile to financial capital, plutocracy, and “the power of money”.–THIS, SIR, IS OBAMA and our current federal government. Not me.

        And again, ED introduced the Bible into this conversation, not me. Go back and read the thread.

        • ElinorDashwood says:

          “Jesus helped the poor. The Roman government did not.
          Jesus’s commandment is that private individuals to serve the needy. Jesus NEVER invoked government to do anything.

          My source is the Bible.” comment by AV

          This comment by you was the first time bible was mentioned in that thread. Just wanted to remind you since you ‘ordered” someone to go back and check.

          • Patriot says:

            As well as the comment that Obama was probably an atheist early on in the thread……which has no basis in anything.

            I vote we stop feeding the beast here.

          • Another View says:

            You, ED, mentioned Christianity. Courtesy of that noted “pundit” S. Colbert. That brought in the Bible.

        • geezlouise says:

          Wow, so apart from the little discussion of who said what when, it seems the “lawyer” who knows everything has resorted to quoting from Wikipedia regarding fascism. That where you get all your other info?

          I’ll take Colbert any day.

          • geezlouise says:

            Heck, I thought people like you thought the president was a socialist….so confused!

            So not quoting, copy and paste, ever so lazy. Hope that’s not how you research for your clients.

            I went down a bit further, which if you were totally upfront, you would have too. See, I can copy and paste too, only I say it’s from Wiki…..not always the best source of information…….

            “…fascism is “a genuinely revolutionary, trans-class form of anti-liberal, and in the last analysis, anti-conservative nationalism” built on a complex range of theoretical and cultural influences. He distinguishes an inter-war period in which it manifested itself in elite-led but populist “armed party” politics opposing socialism and liberalism and promising radical politics to rescue the nation from decadence. Mussolini said that Fascism is revolutionary against liberalism “since it wants to reduce the size of the State to its necessary functions.”…..Paxton sees fascism as “a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion”

            Sounds almost like you….so, who is the real facist?

            Let’s ask Colbert,

          • Another View says:

            It sounds nothing like me.

            And fascism is akin to socialism. Mussolini founded the fascist movement, he was a socialist. Hitler imposed fascism on Germany–he was a socialist (National Socialist Workers Party “Nazi”).

            Barack Hussein Obama is the real fascist. General Motors, Chrysler, Solyndra, Obamacare. Right out of the manifesto!

            Go ask Colbert. He is what passes for intellectualism on the Left.

          • geezlouise says:

            Well I did check your favorite reference site, Wiki, and dang if it does not call the president a fascist . Nor a socialist.

            So why is Wiki right on the one hand and not on the other.

            Colbert is a comedian. Hey, so are you in a way.

          • Another View says:

            I do not use Wikipaedia, nor did I originally cite Colbert. ED did; but she now vows to not read my posts, so she’ll never know that I wrote this.

  53. Shaun Broy says:

    “We the people are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts, not to overthrow the constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the constitution.” – A. Linclon

  54. Sam Card says:

    There is a picture of the US Supreme Court Chief Justice on the cover of Time Magazine, which says Roberts Rules. Read about the federal health care decision. Consider reading the book “Berryville Celebrates 1798-1998” From page 121-128, Dr Thomas C. Iden writes a history of local health care in Clarke County. The title of his story is called “House Calls to HMO…” Health Maintenance Organizations are HMO. Dr. Tom died fairly recently at age 91. In 2010, Dr. Tom and I discussed the new Obamacare and he was opposed to it from a doctor’s perspective. Berryville was blessed to have caring doctors such as Dr. Chambers, Dr. Emerick, Dr. Tom Iden and Dr. York. They were connected to our community and were compassionate. They exemplify the patient – doctor relationship. Now government and greedy corporations collaborate in interfering with the sacred trust between primary doctor and patient. Clarke County is fortunate to have Rescue squad volunteers who give emergency ambulance rides and first aid. Local communities need Primary doctors. Awhile ago, I read a sad story on a Ron Paul libertarian website. A primary doctor wanted to serve a poor community in the Appalachia area of Tennessee that had no doctor at all. This new primary doctor wanted to be an innovative problem solver. He excluded the insurance companies from paying for patient services. He wanted a simple life and only wanted cash for payment of patient services. He was also generous in giving free care to needy people in his community. He just wanted to serve a poor community that needed a doctor. The insurance companies saw to it that this doctor was ordered to not serve that community anymore. The community wanted him as he was providing low cost access to very needy people.

  55. George Archibald says:

    Sam Card’s comments throughout this entire discussion have been the most informed and sensible of the 269 posted since June 28. Many thanks to him for being well read on the Obama healthcare issue and the Supreme Court decision, which was a definite ground-breaker by Chief Justice John Roberts regarding Congress’s exclusive power to tax and the bigger-government implications his tie-breaking decision portends for the future.

    Chief Justice Roberts will probably rule the court for another quarter century, so we might as well tighten our seat belts, and hope for the sake of clarity that thoughtful readers like Sam Card continue to lead the discussions of important public policy debates in this space.

  56. Sam Card says:

    For many years, George Archibald was an accomplished investigative reporter for “The Washington Times” newspaper. Thank you George for your kind complements. During President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930’s, government spending on all levels: (local, state, federal) consumed 15 percent of GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Now combined government spending is 36 percent of GDP. My older brother Dan Card and US Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas were lawyers together serving the Attorney General in Missouri. Dan is a 1972 graduate from University of Virginia Law School and served as an Assistant Attorney General from 1972-1979 for John Danforth and John Ashcroft. In 1992, my brother was the author of “Missouri Appellete Law” book. He was a partner in a St. Louis law firm.

    • Sam Card says:

      Sally Ride died of pancreatic cancer at age 61. She was the first woman in space. Life has risk! She left the comforts of home and survived her adventure in outer space. Winchester Medical Center was ranked 6th best in Virginia. We are fortunate because consequences happen such as Lyme Disease from a tick bite. in 1999, I spent three months traveling in South America. It was risk visiting Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador and Peru. It was an incredible bus journey down the east slope of the Andes Mountains from Banos to the jungle in Puyo. Ecuador has more diversity of plant species than all the United States. In Central America and in the tropical rainforest of Ecuador, I had to be careful to avoid malaria. I hiked to over 16,000 feet elevation in the snow of Cotapoxi Volcano in Ecuador. I did previous hikes in the Andes Mountains to acclimatize to the thin air of high altitude. For safety, I went on a guided group backpacking trip on the Inca Trail to Machu Pichu in Peru. We camped out for several nights and saw stunning views. In Chile, I hiked and camped in Torres Del Paine National Park. I saw fjords, glaciers and mountains on the coastal ferry ride from Puerto Montt to Puerto Natales in Chile. At the Strait of Magellan, I saw Ortland Penguin Colony and visted Ushuaia, Argentina near Cape Horn. The butterflies were colorful at Iguassu Falls by the Argentina, Brazil and Parguay border. The Lonely Planet Guide to South America gave helpful tips on food safety and health.

  57. This is getting better and better……NOT

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamacare-now-estimated-cost-26-trillion-first-decade_648413.html

    Obamacare Now Estimated to Cost $2.6 Trillion in First Decade

    • Shaun Broy says:

      Sarge… I believe you have now successfully earned the honor of the most polarizing figure these days here on the CDN!

      You have successfully bumped our friend Mr. Marro out of that top spot. You have continued to take a hard right turn to the direction of a “radical extremest” with your comments and attempt to shove them down the throats of us all. You are brash and disrespectful to even those who do align more with your general positions.

      To be completely honest, I am not 100% on board with everything regarding this legislation. There seems to be quite a few opinions and pundits preaching their talking points.

      I do know that this will be decided at the ballot box this November. I also know that many of us would go to those blog sites that you like to copy and paste content from on here CONSTANTLY by choice, not as your voice.

      The more you go “wack job” on us, the less credibility you shall earn. I have learned a lot over the last year and decided that I was going to be more effective changing things, only if I started first with the man in the mirror.

      This work goes on… I am better today than yesterday… and moving in the right direction.

      Sarge…. It is time to tone it down and try to understand that we are all truly on the same team here….

      “Freedom of Speech” is not quite the same as shoving rhetoric forcefully down anyone’s throat, in an effort that accomplishes what exactly????

      Hmmmmm……

      • Another View says:

        Barack Hussein Obama is not on America’s Team. Barack Hussein Obama is trying to destroy America. He must be stopped.

      • Shaun, first, please stop trying to convince everyone here that you are somehow rehabilitated or a better man than you were before your last disasterous “campaign”, because to me, that’s what it sounds like you are doing.

        And while you have busy “self improving”, you evidently have failed to improve in the reading comprehension or “attention to detail” department. If you will note, at the bottom of the graph, it says that numbers in the “blog”, which you and Ms Dashwood so derisively dismiss, come from the Congressional Budget Office. The are not the concoction of the republican party or some blogger.

        And what do the numbers say, Shaun? They say what I and others tried to tell everyone, that a government program, that has hardly been implemented, is already rising in cost, just like everything the government does. Just like Social Security, which is broke. Just like Medicaid, which is broke.

        To deny that fact, and to deny the history of the costs overruns of government programs, is to deny reality. And denial of reality is a realm that is almost exclusively occupied by liberals and democrats these days, as has been proven over the last four years.

        So before you come here and attempt to paint me or anyone else as some kind of “radical extremist” simply because we don’t agree with this monstrousity, perhaps you should do some more looking in that mirror of yours.

        And yes, this will be decided soon. 116 days, as a matter of fact. It’s going to be a bad November for Democrats. Very bad.

        • ElinorDashwood says:

          Did you know that according to a 2011 report from the California Public Interest Research Group, offshore tax havens cost the US government roughly $100 billion EACH YEAR? The uber-rich need to ‘pony up’ on their taxes, their greed certainly hasn’t helped the national debt, government programs or our struggling economy.

          Taxation, unpleasant as it might be, is the primary funding mechanism for our country; without it we would be reduced to a wasteland of crumbling roads and buildings, non-existent public services, and anarchy. They fund most of our crucial public functions from road repair and public transport to the police force, education, and even trash collection.

          So why then would a highly educated, politically conscious, and ostensibly patriotic presidential candidate go out of his way to minimize his own share of taxes? At best it shows a greedy mentality, and at worst demonstrates a disregard for the welfare of his country.

          • Another View says:

            Name one [sane] American who does not minimize his tax liability. The fact is that the law requires one to only pay the minimum amount of tax. It is not unpatriotic or “greedy” to follow the law.

            Indeed, the truly “greedy” are those who demand that others pay for their basic needs. Those who demand that others subsidize their student loans, health care, housing, food, etc. are the “greedy”.

            And since you brought up the issues of taxes as needed to fund the country, how about having the bottom 50% pony up some income tax? After all, the “uber-rich” (defined by Obama as $200k a year, hardly “rich”) already pay a grossly disproportionate share of the tax revenues, while at the same time using almost no public resources.

            It is time for the takers in our society to shut up in their demands for more “free stuff” and start contributing to society. Our problem is spending on the takers, not too little taxes taken from the producers.

          • HL Mencken says:

            I believe everyone should pay the same percentage and I’m even fine with 30% as long as it is for EVERYONE, even that money in offshore accounts. I personally, am in the 28% tax bracket while the mega rich pay 15 to 17%. So according to you, Mr. AV… just because their 15 or 17% equals more tax dollars than my 28%, I’m a taker. Why should the rich be allowed to keep and live on a higher percentage of THEIR income than I?

            …and I notice you have nothing to say in regards to ED’s comment on the integrity of the candidate you, so wholeheartedly support.

          • Another View says:

            Abolish the income tax. Abolish all transfer payments. Reduce the federal government to its Constitutional restrictions.

            As for Mr. Romney, he’s done nothing wrong. He is a man of great accomplishment and high integrity. I do not support him wholeheartedly. Rather, I oppose Barack Hussein Obama wholeheartedly, because he is a fascist dictator.

          • Glacier says:

            Barack Hussein Obama Versus Willard Mitt Romney

            I find it odd that those people who call Barack Hussein Obama a fascist dictator, etc., may support Willard Mitt Romney in the presidential election, though maybe not wholeheartedly.

            You will have far more government intervention with Willard Mitt Romney than with Barack Hussein Obama.

            Willard Mitt Romney hasn’t been “allowed” to be a moderate republican, because Willard Mitt Romney decided he had to etch his sketch toward the tea party types, who, while smugly supporting “traditional” family values, will move to intervene in areas the government really should not be. Like in our bedrooms, women’s “private” areas, planned parenthood clinics. So, as long as you are a well to do right wing white “fascist”, who believes government should be abolished, except of course to control those citizens who do not conform to their beliefs, esp in “traditional family values”, you will support Willard Mitt Romney, as that is the best the republicans could come up with. And if he did not repeal Willard Mitt Romneycare in MA, why should he do the same for the Affordable Care Act, which used it as a template? I fear you will be disappointed should Willard Mitt Romney wins, as he is widely thought to be missing his spine.

            I do not wholeheartedly support Barack Hussein Obama, but it is my vote for “all family values” rights for women, rights for those others that get lost in the system, and yes, for the economy.

          • OTOH, perhaps the wealthy see the takers in the welfare line with their cell phones.Perhaps they don’t care to give the buyers of Volts $5000 incentives when the avaerage Volt owner makes $170,000 a year. Perhaps they don’t care to pay for the myriad of otehr waste the government is and has been well known for over the years.

            Perhaps if liberals have a problem with it they should;

            A) FIgure out how to make more money like the rich somehow did

            or

            B) Ask themselves why, with an unstoppable majority in Congress for two years, the Dems chose to focus on healthcare instead of changing the tax laws.

            I submit that the economy has been and remains a far, far more important project than healthcare

          • HL Mencken says:

            Talking to you and AV is like boxing a glacier…Enjoy that metaphor, by the way, because your great grandchildren will have no idea what a glacier is.

          • Another View says:

            The sky is falling, the sky is falling, the sky is falling.

            HLM, you have fallen for “global warming”, apparently having forgotten all about the “global cooling” predicted in the 70s. And the running out of oil. And the scarcity of precious metals such as tungsten. Food shortages. Oh woe is you!

            Junk science is junk science. It is a panacea for those without faith, and the strength to make it in this world.

          • HL Mencken says:

            Read and learn, AV.

            http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full

            “The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn. ”
            ― Alvin Toffler

      • Sam Card says:

        In 2009, Americans on average spent $7,960 per person on health care. In 2009, Canadians spent $4,808. Canada provides better basic health care access to its poorer population, which saves money with preventative care or treating cancer early. Some Canadians also come to the USA to get special medical operations, which are preceived as the best in the world. Many Americans travel to countries to get less expensive dental and medical care. There are well trained Mexican dentists who treat Americans. In 2009, Germans spent on average $4,218 and the French have a longer lifespan than Americans and only spent on average $3,978 on health care.

        • That’s because the French, and Europeans in general, know how to enjoy their lives. 1 month vacations and shorter work days, wine with lunch, wine with dinner, fresh food (not processed crap we Americans eat).

    • Sam Card says:

      The US Supreme Court ruled that states can opt out of Obamacare expansion of medicaid. The Obama Adminstration said recently that it won’t fine people for not having health insurance in states that turn down the expansion. States are suppose to set up exchanges to offer health insurance. Virginia Governor Bob Mc Donnell plans to wait until after the November election, before making any major state decisions concerning Obamacare.

      • Sam Card says:

        Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is against setting up state based health insurance exchanges. Some Virginia state legislators and Governor Bob Mc Donnell also diasagree with Obamacare. However, they feel that a state run exchange is better than one dictated by the federal government.

        • Another View says:

          The Commonwealth of Virginia should resist socialized medicine by any means necessary.

  58. Roscoe Evans says:

    The poor have the same protecion of the law as the rich. It’s what makes this country great. And they have the same rights to hide behind the tax laws, too.

    Work harder. Earn more. Pay more taxes. Do some good. Be happy.

    • Another View says:

      The poor have no claim on the fruits of others’ labors. And that claim is not making our country great, it is breaking its back. Moreover, it is I M M O R A L to rob Peter to pay Paul.

      Let the poor work harder. Let the poor earn more. Let the poor pay more taxes. That would be good. It would make me happy.

      • My 2 Cents says:

        How bout you pay your fair share, rather than paying the same as I do!! Or quit hiding it in offshore accounts!! Like Mr. Romney!!!! That would make me happy!!!

        • Another View says:

          Define “fair share”. The so-called rich are already paying all the taxes. The top 10% pay more than 70% of all income taxes, while the bottom 50% pay less than 2%.

          So how much more do you want the “rich” to pay? 100% Shall you and others just leave a forwarding address at the welfare office so that your allowance can be forwarded to you? Because that is apparently what you desire; to live off the labors of others. Would that make you happy?

  59. Roscoe Evans says:

    The “poor” include the mentally ill, the mentally retarded, the physically handicapped, the aged, widows, and orphans, and many other disadvantaged peoples. I know first hand. As an attorney, I represented them, for nearly 20 years. Many of them are incapable of any kind of productive work. Others can work, but not to the extent that they can support themselves or their entire families on their own earnings.

    Your writings, like the noncom’s, suggest that you think they’re the “undesirables” of the country. But they’re as American as you and me, and they’re just as entitled to their lives and to their happiness.

    The affordable health care act was intended to extend health care to folks like them, while decelerating the rapid increases in health care costs for those of us who currently can afford health care insurance.

    I’m glad that our nation does just a bit to help them out, and to make their lives more bearable, and I don’t mind paying my taxes, and more, to help them out.

    Work harder. Earn more. Pay more taxes. Be grateful for what you have. Do some good. Be happy.

    • Sam Card says:

      Starting in 2014, millions of people over the federal poverty line will have subsisdiized private health insurance through the new state exchanges. Federal / state supported medicaid now covers mostly children, mothers and disabled people. Obamacare medicaid expansion would cover about half of the currently uninsured. For the first three years, the federal government will pay for the medicaid expansion. As for control and power, give an inch and government will want a mile. States can opt out.

  60. Another View says:

    The federal government is not empowered to assist the “needy”. It is for private charities and churches to provide this service.

    Moreover the federal government is not going broke due to the truly needy, but rather the truly selfish. 99 weeks of unemployment compensation, food stamps, corporate subsidies, Amtrack, agricultural price supports, Fannie and Freddie, Social Security, Medicare an Medicaid–all unconstitutional and unworkable. The spending must stop.

    About 50% of the country receives government monies. Government monies are really the producers’ monies. It is time for the takers to become producers.

    • Sam Card says:

      Rising health care costs are inflating Medicaid. Many states have cut spending on state universities. In all 50 states, there are funding needs for infrastructure, such as roads and public transportation. Spending for Medicaid is growing much faster than state tax revenue.

      • Sam Card says:

        About 526,000 uninsured Virginia residents between age 18 and 65 would gain insurance coverage under the plan to expand Medicaid and set up insurance exchanges. Opponents to expanding Virginia’s Medicaid program argue the cost could reach $2.2 billion over ten years. Valley Health spends about $50 million annually caring for uninsured patients. There are citizens who qualify for a US passport, financial aid to college, Medicaid or or FEMA(Federal Emergency Management Agency) disaster relief, but choose not to apply as they don’t want to interact with bureaucrats. Some travelers now avoid planes, as they don’t want to cope with long airport lines, harrassment or body groping by the TSA. Many bureaucrats do outstanding public service, but some are arrogant, incompetent and stupid idiots. With a stretch, some interpret their own meaning of what the rules say. Many resent their taxes growing the intrusive government.

  61. Michele Worthing says:

    AV – what do you believe in? It seems you hate taxes and you hate all government. You hate President Obama and you hate poor people.

    The genius of the Founding Fathers was in creating a structure that could evolve with our changing circumstances. We are not all small farmers anymore, some of us live in cities and towns, and we need roads, schools, fire departments and other things that did not exist in their day. Would you get on a plane that hadn’t had a safety inspection? The U.S. has evolved, it started out as 2.4 million people in 13 small colonies, now it is 360 million people filling a continent, plus Hawaii, which we stole and Alaska, which we bought… or don’t you believe in evolution either?? The Bible evolved over many centuries and in the hands of many authors, it wasn’t divinely revealed in American English.

    Likewise, Congress is empowered to make laws over time to respond to the peoples’ needs, not every detail of all the programs you dislike had to be enumerated in the original Constitution, that is why Congress makes laws. Just because you don’t like them doesn’t invalidate them.

    • Another View says:

      TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION, I believe in freedom and liberty, and that our rights are bestowed upon us by God; NOT man or government. I believe in the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutions of the United States and the Commonwealth of Virginia. I believe in the rule of law. And I believe in God, and his son, Jesus Christ.

      TO RESPOND TO YOUR POINT ON THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, you do not understand it by your reasoning. The Constitution does not “evolve”. If the Constitution needs to be changed, it must be amended. There is a process for that. To date, the Constitution has not been amended to permit the federal government to provide for individual needs, or to subsidize “green jobs” and determine the water flow of our toilets.

      Would I get on a plane that hadn’t had a safety inspection? Where is it written that safety inspections must be conducted by government? Would not the plane’s operator have the most incentive to ensure that its plane was safe? After all, if the operator’s plane crashes, it loses the most. If the government fails to perform adequate safety inspections, and the plane goes down, the government loses nothing.

      Moreover, the federal government does not, and never did, exist to provide “roads, schools, fire departments and other things”. Those things, to the extent that they are required, are best left to state and local government, or even better, private individuals. Most roads used to be privately owned, and they were more than adequate. Private schooling is far superior to the government monopoly which churns out ill prepared students annually. And in Clarke County we have a volunteer fire department that serves us well.

      I do not believe in evolution. If you think hard enough on the subject, neither should you. (Hint: why has it stopped?)

      The Bible did not evolve. The Bible was translated. It is the divinely inspired word of God. God is, he does not evolve. That man deviates from God’s word and “evolves” in ways that God did not intend, cannot be laid at God’s feet. Free will?

      Finally, Congress IS NOT “empowered to make laws over time to respond to the peoples’ needs”. Congress is restricted to the powers enumerated in Article I, Section 8. Just “because you don’t like” that restriction doesn’t “invalidate” it. And just because Congress has exceeded its authority does not validate those ultra vires acts.

      If you want socialism, fine. Take your case to the people, and amend the Constitution. BUT, until you do, Obamacare, and most all federal spending and regulation, remains unconstitutional. Just because you like Big Brother does not legitimize him.

      • Wow…you really are full of yourself, ain’t you?

        Let’s look at your opinions:
        A. “I believe in the constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia.” Bully for you, especially since this very document states unequivocally that the state must, among other things, provide “for a system of free public elementary and secondary schools for all children of school age throughout the Commonwealth, and shall seek to ensure that an educational program of high quality is established and continually maintained.” (Article VIII, Section 1)
        http://legis.virginia.gov/Laws/search/constitution.htm

        B. “The Constitution does not “evolve”. If the Constitution needs to be changed, it must be amended.” In case you failed to read the dictionary, amending the document means that, in essence, it has indeed “evolved” from the document on parchment signed and ratified in 1787, and subsequently amended in 1789.

        a·mend, verb (used with object)
        1. to alter, modify, rephrase, or add to or subtract from (a motion, bill, constitution, etc.) by formal procedure: Congress may amend the proposed tax bill.
        2. to change for the better; improve: to amend one’s ways.
        3. to remove or correct faults in; rectify.

        e·volve, verb (used with object) http://dictionary.reference.com
        1. to develop gradually: to evolve a scheme.

        C. “Those things, to the extent that they are required, are best left to state and local government, or even better, private individuals. Most roads used to be privately owned, and they were more than adequate.”
        Roads & railroads used to be private-owner things, yet there were myriad problems with those things, too. With railroads, there was much disparity between companies as far as track gauges and having to switch tracks to switch to a different company, all which held up efficient transport of goods and other products by rail.

        The road system had similar drawbacks, as some companies put a lot into road construction and maintenance, while others didn’t. You could argue that the federal government had no power to regulate and standardize such things, but I would counter that – through the vested powers of regulating interstate commerce – the feds do have such power. The interstate highway system, begun under President Eisenhower (a GOP icon arguably as important as Reagan, perhaps moreso), is a prime case in point. Same with the Army Corps of Engineers’ oversight of ports, canals, shipping channels, and other such things.

        D. “I do not believe in evolution. If you think hard enough on the subject, neither should you. (Hint: why has it stopped?)”
        You seriously believe this? That God’s Creation has ceased its ability to adapt to the processes of life that change habitats around the planet? That genetic anomalies don’t introduce new characteristics that, over reporductive time, don’t have an impact on those species – or perhaps cause a new species to come into being? That all of the evidence that confirms that organisms can and do adapt to changing circumstances (for ex., the gender switching seen in certain species of amphibians, when only 1 gender is found, to ensure that species reproduction can still occur) is bogus? I would suggest you remove your blinders on that one.

        E. “Finally, Congress IS NOT “empowered to make laws over time to respond to the peoples’ needs”.
        Here, again, you are wrong. Things like the “necessary and proper” clause, and the very mechanism set up by the Constitution, creates the power of Congress to craft legislation that – if duly signed by the President and either upheld by the SCOTUS (as in ACA) or never challenged by a court case – is the law of the land. Your personal opinions aside, in the absence of a legal change (either by new law or an over-ruling by a court case), the laws enacted by Congress are binding.

        Your sincerity is consistent, but it is also consistently wrong. You demean and belittle all those who deign to disagree with you, which further erodes your credibility.

        • Another View says:

          1. You don’t understand the necessary and proper clause. Perhaps you should read it, and then read the Obamacare decision. You are wrong on this point.

          2. Name one (1) new species that has occurred that used to be another. Evolution is but a theory; indeed, it is a theory repudiated by Darwin before his death. How ’bout that?

          3. The Constitution’s Commerce Clause does not mean what you claim it does. Some evidence of that? Eisenhower did not use the Commerce Clause to justify the interstate highway system, he used the defense powers. Internal improvements were one of the first great skirmishes between the Constitutionalists and the Big Government types.

          4. Your point about the Constitution’s amendment process is vague; are you suggesting that the Constitution changes without amendment? That is what Worthing posited, as have others. Because if you are, you are wrong on that point as well. But obviously if you amend something, it changes. As in the 10th Amendment which makes it clear that most all our current federal spending and regulation is unconstitutional. Read that bit of “evolution”.

          5. I am well aware what the Constitution of Virginia provides, with respect to education and other things. I never disputed that. Since you quoted my prior post, you should realize that I pointed out that education was not a federal concern, but something to be left to the states and localities, and even better, private parties. If I had my way, I would amend the Constitution of Virginia to eliminate the public education requirement. But since that is not likely to occur, I would legislatively institute a voucher system, to permit school choice. Parents, not government, should be able to decide their children’s education. And I stand by my statement that our public school system is vastly inferior to the vast majority of private schools. It is.

          Finally, I do not demean anyone, unless your ego is so tender that disagreement on issues equals demeaning.

          • On the species question: the species of squirrels that inhabit the north and south rims of the Grand Canyon serve as a good case in point. Trace their genetics back, and they’re the same species, yet – since the great Colorado River began carving that canyon and the population was split, each has developed distinct and unique characteristics over time.

            My point on the “evolve” question as related to the Constitution’s amendment process is only vague within your rigid and unyielding opinion. Amending the document to address wrongs (slavery, the disenfranchisement of certain members of society, etc.) or other things does indeed meean that the Constitution grew, adapted, and thereby “evolved” from the document our Founding Fathers signed…something they fully intended it to do by including such a mechanism within it.

            Yet again, you are consistent. You swipe aside any opinion that differes from your own narrow reading as from someone who “should re-read” whatever part since “you don’t understand it.” I would maintain that I do understand it quite well, thank you, just not to your liking since my opinion differs from your opinion on the matter. I did not say that the ACA was argued under the necessary and proper clause, per se; rather, I included it as an example of the SCOTUS working as the Framers intended it to work (albeit not to your liking, clearly). Don’t fog the issue.

          • Another View says:

            But the necessary and proper clause was a part of the Obamacare argument. So I am not “fog[ging]” the issue. You don’t understand the issue. Or the purpose of the necessary and proper clause, which is restricted merely to enabling the federal government the ability to take on discrete tasks necessary to the exercise of its enumerated powers.

            You didn’t identify a new species that evolved from another.

            And if you agree that the Constitution can only “evolve” by the amendment process, then you agree with me that most all of what the federal government does today is unconstitutional. Because you would then know that the Constitution gives the federal government no role in providing firemen, policemen, schools, etc.

          • Dude, I never agreed with that other commenter’s post that the feds were empowered to provide things like firemen and the like. You’re tossing in added words, struggling to hold onto any semblance of a point in this tit-for-tat.

            The federal government, through duly enacted legislation passed by the Congress assembled and signed into law by the President, can and has expanded to address new developments and aspects of our lives and such – and, up to and until the SCOTUS or another lower court overrules said laws via a court case, or a new law is duly passed and signed, those laws are the law of the land. I understand the matter just fine.

            It is you, consistently, who is doggedly wrong and unyielding and adamantly opposed to acknowledging that others might have the correct answer and you the wrong one. Your only defense is to claim that any and all dissenters merely “don’t understand” whatever issue it is, or “need to re-read” whatever part of the document you claim they are misunderstanding.

            As to the species issue, consider this:
            “1. How can one species “turn into” another?
            One species does not “turn into” another or several other species — not in an instant, anyway. The evolutionary process of speciation is how one population of a species changes over time to the point where that population is distinct and can no longer interbreed with the “parent” population. In order for one population to diverge enough from another to become a new species, there needs to be something to keep the populations from mixing. Often a physical boundary divides the species into two (or more) populations and keeps them from interbreeding. If separated for long enough and presented with sufficiently varied environmental conditions, each population takes its own distinct evolutionary path. Sometimes the division between the populations is never breached, and reproductive isolation remains intact purely for geographical reasons. It is possible, though, if the populations have been separate for long enough, that even if brought back together and given the opportunity to interbreed they won’t, or they won’t be successful if they try.”

            http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat05.html

            3. Does evolution stop once a species has become a species?
            Evolution does not stop once a species becomes a species. Every population of living organisms is undergoing some sort of evolution, though the degree and speed of the process varies greatly from one group to another. Populations that experience a major change in environmental conditions, whether that change comes in the form of a new predator or a new island to disperse to, evolve much more quickly than do populations in a more stable set of conditions. This is because evolution is driven by natural selection, and because when the environment changes, selective pressures change, favoring one portion of the population more heavily than it was favored before the change.”

            4. Is evolution happening now?
            Evolution is always happening, though often at rates far too slow to be observed in a matter of days, weeks, or even years. The effects of evolution can be felt in almost every aspect of our daily lives, though, from medical and agricultural dilemmas to the process of choosing a good mate. In medicine, there’s the question of how long the antibiotics we take now will remain effective, given the relatively fast rate at which bacteria can evolve resistance to drugs. In agriculture, the need to protect this year’s crops is pitted against the concern that doing so will set the stage for insects to evolve pesticide resistance.”

            See also this rather informative, and readily accessible for the “common man,” article – http://education.nationalgeographic.com/education/encyclopedia/speciation/?ar_a=1&ar_r=3

            Which, as you should be able to see, supports my earlier statement that the Grand Canyon squirrels over time became two distinct species by evolving through speciation once the Grand Canyon began to form.

            You, most likely, will parse my words and cling desperately to any pixel that might help you keep afloat. Have at it, sir, as I am done crossing swords rhetorically with you.

          • Another View says:

            That is a shame. But you still don’t understand the Constitution if you think that it can be changed by mere legislation left unscathed by the Supreme Court. Your public school history class let you down.

            And I still do not believe in evolution. And you still have not identified a species that evolved from another. Or confronted Darwin’s abandonment of his theory.

          • Actually, it seems like you’re the one who refuses to accept some pretty solid arguments. Will posted links about two species of squirrels taht did indeed evolve from one ancestral species; your refusal to accept the proven science just makes you – again – like some dug-in outlier.

            He never said that the Constitution changes by laws passed. He, as with the other person up there, were talking about how the government itself – empowered by the Constitution – has grown and adapted to a new world not even dreamed of by the Founding Fathers. You are good at one thing, though, AV – you certainly do know how to consistently show that you will refuse to debate on merits and instead deflect and distort and tritely dismiss anyone who doesn’t see things your way. Guess those are traits a good lawyer needs, eh?

          • Another View says:

            I do debate on the merits. But YOU ARE SIMPLY WRONG to claim that the Constitution empowers the government to grow to adapt to changing times ABSENT AMENDMENT. The government does not get to decide its scope and power, only the people do. That you people insist on arguing that government decides for itself means that we have no Constitution, no limit on governmental authority, and no protection of our God given rights.

          • Whoa…cool your sprockets, Mr. Spacely.

            Your irrational ranting ignores the core of the Constitution’s very functioning: IF a law that expands the federal government is duly passed (“duly,” as in passed according to the proper legal manner prescribed in the Constitution and in support of its prescribed powers and the 6 goals enshrined in the Preamble) and subsequently and duly signed by the President (again, per the Constitution), and is neither overturned via a new law so passed and signed NOR overturned by a successful court challenge (up to and including the SCOTUS), then…wait for it…said law and expansion of the federal government IS, by ALL legal definitions, valid and of full legal standing. That is irrefutable, as that is the prescribed process in the very document you apparently wallpaper your office with.

            EVERY law that is passed successfully and left to stand on the books is the people, through its government, deciding its scope and power. Now, one can argue until Christ returns in His final Glory as to the morality of this or the interpretation of that (which you do very well). But the basic legal process you here decry is the very process spelled out by Mr. Madison et al. lo these 225 years ago.

            You want to strike down ACA? Thanks to the SCOTUS’ ruling, there’s a proper process to go through (hint: it’s spelled out for you in Schoolhouse Rock’s little ditty “I’m Just a Bill”) to make that happen. You want to shrink the size of government? OK, put your name out there, start a group, elect a majority, and “make it so, #1.” There is a process, and it was followed in the case of the ACA and the national parks, and the other federal agencies that impact our daily lives. Is it a perfect system? HA! Far from it. But it is a damn sight better than the myopic, fractious, Darwinian place you long to reside in.

          • There are abundant sources that refute your statement that Darwin “abandoned” his theory of evolution:

            http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/darwin.htm

            http://www.holysmoke.org/cretins/darwin2.htm

            http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/03/31/darwins-deathbed-conversion-legend (This site, a Creationist site if ever there was one, also refutes your claim.)

          • Have you ever heard the saying, ‘there are no atheists in foxholes’ ? Think a person’s deathbed would apply…

  62. Monsieur Bubba says:

    You forgot the FAA and NASA.

  63. Another View says:

    Well Tom, what you advocate is neither constitutional nor the rule of law. It is also not a republican form of government.

    Indeed, what you argue is for pure democracy. Our Founders did not establish that system of government. But what do you care? You don’t believe in the Constitution!

    • Bob's Sporting Goods Wholesale says:

      I think I speak for the volumes of people who are sick and tired of this Website being hijacked by Another View. To come here daily and see his spew of rhetoric is so old. I think its time to move on and I know of tons more people who feel the same way! This used to be a fairly decent site to explore and see the happenings here in Berryville and Clarke, however its the same political junk everyday used by the same 2 PEOPLE and its sooooo mundane now! Good luck CDN, hopefully you can get a hold of your site again!!!! Sarge and Another View, WOW! Thats all that can be said!!!!

      • Another View says:

        Yes. Let only those who agree with the Democrats, statists, fascists, and the Left be heard. Debate from opposing views must be suppressed!

        • If I might politely interject a comment here, I think that even those of us who agree with some of what you say, are a bit put off by your delivery, tone, and disrespect.

          I agree with Bob, let’s move on. you have had your 15 minutes of fame.

          • Another View says:

            I’m put off by Roscoe Evans’s race baiting, and many of the names I’ve been called by him and others. I have yet to suggest that their views be suppressed.

      • If you don’t like it, don’t read it. Simple.

  64. Curious says:

    AV appears to have a constant touch for this site! Almost makes you wonder? Hmmm……..Could there be a Conspiracy Theory going on behind the walls of CDN?

  65. ElinorDashwood says:

    The right to freedom of speech is for everyone, whether you agree with them or not. If individuals seem to be posting all day perhaps they are retired, unemployed, self-employed, or off for the summer.

  66. Michele Worthing says:

    So AV you actually do not understand that Evolution is proven science?

    Having read 2 biographies of Charles Darwin I was sure your assertion that Darwin repudiated Evolution “on his deathbed” was untrue. Multiple sources confirm that and refute your quote. It is apparently still a popular urban myth on Creationist websites, from which you lifted it, but it is a “lie that won’t die.” It isn’t true. Check a few other sources, maybe some objective ones. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

    Further, you say the Bible did not evolve. OK, it developed historically over time, is that better? Many churches don’t even agree on how many or which books are contained in the Bible. Is it just the word Evolution you are afraid of? Way back in this stream I didn’t say the Constitution evolved, I agree with you it has been amended 27 times. I said the US has evolved. Someone noticed that but apparently you did not.

    • Another View says:

      If evolution was a “proven science”, it would not be referred to as a theory.

      it is not proven.

      And I lifted nothing from any website. I have actually read the “Origin of Species” and the “Bible”. I believe the Bible. You may believe what you wish.

  67. Sam Card says:

    Evidence suggests that there are now drug resistent bacteria. Evidence suggests that 65 million years ago, a ten mile wide meteor exploded by the northern Yucatan Pennisula and Gulf of Mexico. An asteroid or a comet impact could have ended the age of dinoasaurs. Cold blooded reptiles, with their large surface area, were not able to adapt to the drastic climate change. Small agile warm blooded mammals had survival advantages. Evidence suggests that flying birds are descendents from a branch of dinosaurs.

  68. Sam Card says:

    Center For Disease Control reports more whooping cough in the USA. In 1925, the Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia was clogged with ice and Nome had an outbreak of diptheria. Twenty mushers and 150 sled dogs relayed diptheria serum for 674 miles from Seward, Alaska in Prince William Sound to Nome by the Bering Strait. The diptheria antitoxin arrived by dog sled after five days of arduous wilderness winter travel and saved Nome from a worse epidemic. Influenza killed more people in 1918 than World War I.

  69. Sam Card says:

    The Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race commerorates the 1925 serum delivery to Nome. On January 22, 1925, Dr. Curtis Welch sent a message to US Public Health Service in Washington, D.C. Alaskan natives had no resistence to diptheria and there would have been high mortality in Nome, without the serum. West Coast hospitals sent serum to Seattle and then it was shipped to Seward, Alaska. All dog sled participants received commendation letters from President Calvin Coolidge. Alaska and Hawaii became states in 1959.

  70. SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Not

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/cbo-to-employers-obamacare-has-4b-more-in-taxes-than-expected/article/2503013

    CBO to employers: Obamacare has $4B more in taxes than expected

  71. Sam Card says:

    AIDS has killed 35 million people. It has created a generation of African orphans and Washington, D.C. has a lot of AIDS. The 19th International AIDS Conference is meeting in Washington, D.C. There is a multibillion effort to get HIV medicines to poor developing countries.

    • Another View says:

      AIDS is the most preventable disease in the world. It’s spread is an indictment of man’s immoral behavior.

  72. kellcsmith says:

    You guys have a lot of interesting things to say, but you’ve gotten way off subject. Maybe you should start your own blog. Might I suggest Tumblr or Typepad?