OK Health Care Freedom Amendment, State Question 756

Created by CitizenTopix on Oct 11, 2010

1,539 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#22180 Jul 2, 2012
asdf wrote:
<quoted text>
Well you are right about that but don't call me a liar when I posted proof of what I said. It is the law that stands right now so it's what matters.
==========
No it is not. You posted parts of the law and omitted critical parts so as to give wrong impression.

If omission is not lying it is damn close.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#22181 Jul 2, 2012
asdf wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove me wrong
==========
Already did.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#22182 Jul 2, 2012
Note: This morning the number of people who agree with ACA has increased from the time of the Court decision.

More will continue to approve of the Courts decision as they learn the credible facts of ACA and not just right-wing talking points taken out of context that leave out the whole story.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#22183 Jul 2, 2012
(CBS News) Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court's four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama's health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations.

Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy - believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law - led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold.

"He was relentless," one source said of Kennedy's efforts. "He was very engaged in this."

But this time, Roberts held firm. And so the conservatives handed him their own message which, as one justice put it, essentially translated into, "You're on your own."

The conservatives refused to join any aspect of his opinion, including sections with which they agreed, such as his analysis imposing limits on Congress' power under the Commerce Clause, the sources said.

Instead, the four joined forces and crafted a highly unusual, unsigned joint dissent. They deliberately ignored Roberts' decision, the sources said, as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.

The inner-workings of the Supreme Court are almost impossible to penetrate. The Court's private conferences, when the justices discuss cases and cast their initial votes, include only the nine members - no law clerks or secretaries are permitted. The justices are notoriously close-lipped, and their law clerks must agree to keep matters completely confidential.

But in this closely-watched case, word of Roberts' unusual shift has spread widely within the Court, and is known among law clerks, chambers' aides and secretaries. It also has stirred the ire of the conservative justices, who believed Roberts was standing with them.

After the historic oral arguments in March, the two knowledgeable sources said, Roberts and the four conservatives were poised to strike down at least the individual mandate. There were other issues being argued - severability and the Medicaid extension - but the mandate was the ballgame.

It required individuals to buy insurance or pay a penalty. Congress had never before in the history of the nation ordered Americans to buy a product from a private company as part of its broad powers to regulate commerce. Opponents argued that the law exceeded Congress' power under the Constitution, and an Atlanta-based federal appeals court agreed.

The Atlanta-based federal appeals court said Congress didn't have that kind of expansive power, and it struck down the mandate as unconstitutional.

On this point - Congress' commerce power - Roberts agreed. In the Court's private conference immediately after the arguments, he was aligned with the four conservatives to strike down the mandate.

Roberts was less clear on whether that also meant the rest of the law must fall, the source said. The other four conservatives believed that the mandate could not be lopped off from the rest of the law and that, since one key part was unconstitutional, the entire law must be struck down.

Because Roberts was the most senior justice in the majority to strike down the mandate, he got to choose which justice would write the Court's historic decision. He kept it for himself.

Over the next six weeks, as Roberts began to craft the decision striking down the mandate, the external pressure began to grow. Roberts almost certainly was aware of it.


I thought this interesting that Roberts was against the healthcare bill then changed his vote at the end. Now why would one change their mind shortly before the vote for or against.
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22184 Jul 2, 2012
"And wanting to get rid of Obamacare and your OKey dokey with letting people die without healthcare and letting people with pre extisting conditions suffer and let millions of Americans be overcharged by insurance companies that profit off of people illness. Yes your a wing nut."

This is absolutely ridiculous. No one wants that and you damn well know it. It can be done without Obamacare. I don't have to agree with his dictator policies to want people to get help. Newsflash, Obama is not the smartest man on the Earth and he's not a golden idol.

"Oh, and by the way, I'm from OKC but topix one day changed my city
Oh, I know your from a dumpy little town in Oklahoma but people actually have these things called lap tops and they can travel with you. And most hotels have wireless. You must never get out of town that often."

Another idiotic statement. You have no clue what town I'm in, but I can tell you it's not Perkins, although there is nothing with Perkins.

You didn't get far out of town either.

"But I'll be out for the next day or two.
You can call me a libtard, I'll just call you one of those wingnuts that probably claim their Christian too..which means War=good, letting people suffer from insurance companies greed = even better, spending a penney to help someone besides yourself = bad."

I knew the bigotry would come out sooner and later. Bigots are always very angry and nasty.

Not that insurance companies are angels, but you are putting the blame on only half of the problem. The other half is the outrageous amount of money that doctors, clinics, providers and hospitals charge. Insurance companies actually help you in that department.
Lets say you have Bluecross/Blueshield with an 80/20 policy. You go to the ER one night because you think you broke your leg. You are going to be charged by the hospital to walk in the door, you'll have a physician's fee and you'll have an xray fee. You'll also pay for any pain meds that are given to you. This can add up to a $2000 bill.
But if that hospital accepts your Bluecross/Blueshield, that means that have made a contract with them. In that contract, it states how much Bluecross/Blueshield will pay for those services. They will bill Bluecross for $2000, but they may only get $1200.00 of it. For instance, I had an xray not too long ago. They billed my ins for $75.00. Insurance is contracted to only pay $38.00 for the xray. So they paid 80% of that and I had to pay the other %20 bc that's what my policy states. So instead of 20% of $75.00, I paid 20% of $38.00. Insurance companies are not the ones driving healthcare prices up.
And now with Obamas new taxes on charitable hospitals and certain machines that are bought, your prices are going to jump even higher because hospitals need to be able to pay those taxes.
I do hope you disappear for a few days because you're very nasty with a huge chip on your shoulder.
You have your own little world going on there don’t you? Your anger will destroy you
But you do make me smile in your ignorance….
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22185 Jul 2, 2012
Another ridiculous post. First of all, your made up Mary is in California so she wouldn't know freedom if it slapped her in the face.

Second of all, there are millions of small business owners all of this country right now that have refused to hire anyone until after the election is over because Obama has put so many on regulations out, they can't keep their heads above water. He has trashed this economy and his policies make it even worse, they know they can't get anywhere with him in charge. They were also holding back to see if Obamacare would be passed before they hired people because they knew if they went over 50 employees, it would cost them big time.

I am a small business owner libtard. Obama and his policies have fixed it to where I don't hire people, the regulations from his administration cost me too much money and it keeps me from expanding, therefore it means I can't hire more people.

Just another stomp on the economy from your dictator in chief.
Justaminute wrote:
Here's some people that have benefited from that stinken Obamacare that the wingnuts want to kick to the curb. Just us little ole business owners, we don't contribute to anything, right wingnuts, cause we have to get insurance on our own if we can afford it.
• Mary Duffy said she was terrified the Supreme Court would strike down health-care reform.
• The 62-year-old small-business owner in Redwood City, Calif., has had insurance since 2010 thanks to the Affordable Care Act's small health plan for people with pre-existing conditions. Duffy, a three-time breast cancer survivor, lost her insurance after she lost her job in 2008.
• "I was looking at $1,080 in meds again and having to beg my doctors to see me," Duffy said, describing what would happen if the Supreme Court invalidated the entire law (which is the outcome dissenting justices wanted).
• "I was more relieved you could imagine," said Steve Clark, a 63-year-old business administrator at a small IT firm in St. Louis. Clark also lost his insurance during an unemployment spell, and his new job doesn't cover him.
• After Clark enrolled in the PCIP in March, he said, he finally saw a dermatologist about a small lesion on his lip. The lesion turned out to be no big deal, but the dermatologist found a melanoma on Clark's back. Now he's undergoing treatment with an oncologist.
• David Howard, a 60-year-old co-owner of an interior design company in San Francisco, described himself as "extremely relieved" by the Supreme Court's decision. He'd been uninsured for more than a year before enrolling in 2010. Early last year a surprise case of meningococcal meningitis put him in the hospital for a month. If he hadn't been insured, he said, he would have had to file for bankruptcy protection and give up his business.
• Pritchard, 31, said she'd been turned down by insurance companies because she'd been treated for a benign tumor seven years ago. "It’s a huge relief and a load off to know I can pay for health insurance and I can't be turned down for my so-called pre-existing conditions."
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22186 Jul 2, 2012
Packing Heat wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a clear cut case of "I earned mine" and you, Obama or anyone else will never get a dime of it unless I say so. That has never been my point, it is to fight along side of those that oppose Obama and his policies. As I have told you many times before, the arguement here in Oklahoma is for entertainment only because Obama does not stand a chance of ever winning Oklahoma, PERIOD!
Furthermore, no one is going to tear their hair out just because the SCOTUS ruled Obamacare Tax is the largest tax increase ever. They did rule that the mandate was unconstitutional under the commerce clause and the fact that it was ruled a tax is all that is needed to repeal it just as I laid out for you earlier. That is just the facts we both have to except.
I'm not sure how you figure the Obamacare Tax will ever payoff since it will be very short lived from here on. You liberals will revolt regardless of how we get Obama out of office so that funny little remark is just humorous at best. My only question is when will the liberals start the riots? On election night when Obama loses or will you wait until January when he and his family are loading up on that Greyhound Bus bound for Chicago.
Will Obama put on his walking shoes and join you in your riots or will he ignore you like he did the Union Cheeseheads in their fight to save their Union, LOL? Personally I think you should just forgive him since he could not go against his puppet masters. You know, the same ones that own him and Romney, remember?
So the bottom line is I willl never spend a dime of my money to support the Obamacare Tax and Senate Republicans will repeal the full law through the budget reconciliation process just like it was passed. Then you and I will need to join hands and force all of those nuts on Goat Hill to get busy passing a real reform bill that would really cut cost instead of tax everyone to death like the Obamacare Tax would if it were allowed to survive. Will you unclench your fists and join in or will you liberals just burn the towns down and do like you always do, riot?
My bet is the riots will start a few weeks before election time, fueled by libtards and Occutards (which are self admitted anarchists and communists) martial law will have to be implemented bc of it and elections suspended. You have to remember that these same people are the same ones that did all of this in Cairo and Libya, and have stated they want to make us Cairo. Worked out well for them with their new Muslim Brotherhood President huh?
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22187 Jul 2, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
No it is not. You posted parts of the law and omitted critical parts so as to give wrong impression.
If omission is not lying it is damn close.
Then stop talking about how wrong I am and show me WHERE I was wrong and what I omitted. Just because you say it doesn't make it true. Tell us what I omitted.
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22188 Jul 2, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
Already did.
Where? I don't see it.
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22189 Jul 2, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
(CBS News) Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court's four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama's health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations.
Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy - believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law - led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold.
"He was relentless," one source said of Kennedy's efforts. "He was very engaged in this."
But this time, Roberts held firm. And so the conservatives handed him their own message which, as one justice put it, essentially translated into, "You're on your own."
The conservatives refused to join any aspect of his opinion, including sections with which they agreed, such as his analysis imposing limits on Congress' power under the Commerce Clause, the sources said.
Instead, the four joined forces and crafted a highly unusual, unsigned joint dissent. They deliberately ignored Roberts' decision, the sources said, as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.
The inner-workings of the Supreme Court are almost impossible to penetrate. The Court's private conferences, when the justices discuss cases and cast their initial votes, include only the nine members - no law clerks or secretaries are permitted. The justices are notoriously close-lipped, and their law clerks must agree to keep matters completely confidential.
But in this closely-watched case, word of Roberts' unusual shift has spread widely within the Court, and is known among law clerks, chambers' aides and secretaries. It also has stirred the ire of the conservative justices, who believed Roberts was standing with them.
After the historic oral arguments in March, the two knowledgeable sources said, Roberts and the four conservatives were poised to strike down at least the individual mandate. There were other issues being argued - severability and the Medicaid extension - but the mandate was the ballgame.
It required individuals to buy insurance or pay a penalty. Congress had never before in the history of the nation ordered Americans to buy a product from a private company as part of its broad powers to regulate commerce. Opponents argued that the law exceeded Congress' power under the Constitution, and an Atlanta-based federal appeals court agreed.
The Atlanta-based federal appeals court said Congress didn't have that kind of expansive power, and it struck down the mandate as unconstitutional.
On this point - Congress' commerce power - Roberts agreed. In the Court's private conference immediately after the arguments, he was aligned with the four conservatives to strike down the mandate.
Roberts was less clear on whether that also meant the rest of the law must fall, the source said. The other four conservatives believed that the mandate could not be lopped off from the rest of the law and that, since one key part was unconstitutional, the entire law must be struck down.
Because Roberts was the most senior justice in the majority to strike down the mandate, he got to choose which justice would write the Court's historic decision. He kept it for himself.
Over the next six weeks, as Roberts began to craft the decision striking down the mandate, the external pressure began to grow. Roberts almost certainly was aware of it.
I thought this interesting that Roberts was against the healthcare bill then changed his vote at the end. Now why would one change their mind shortly before the vote for or against.
I saw this yesterday. I'm sure the answer is clear.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#22190 Jul 2, 2012
asdf wrote:
Another ridiculous post. First of all, your made up Mary is in California so she wouldn't know freedom if it slapped her in the face.
Second of all, there are millions of small business owners all of this country right now that have refused to hire anyone until after the election is over because Obama has put so many on regulations out, they can't keep their heads above water. He has trashed this economy and his policies make it even worse, they know they can't get anywhere with him in charge. They were also holding back to see if Obamacare would be passed before they hired people because they knew if they went over 50 employees, it would cost them big time.
I am a small business owner libtard. Obama and his policies have fixed it to where I don't hire people, the regulations from his administration cost me too much money and it keeps me from expanding, therefore it means I can't hire more people.
Just another stomp on the economy from your dictator in chief.
<quoted text>
I have always wonder if Justaminute helped her employees with getting healthcare. Or because of the business she and her husband is in are they on their own in getting health insurance.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#22191 Jul 2, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
I thought this interesting that Roberts was against the healthcare bill then changed his vote at the end. Now why would one change their mind shortly before the vote for or against.
==========
Nothing unusual about changing positions a number of times before making a final decision. They shouldn't be locked in until the final deliberations are finished and it is time to vote.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#22192 Jul 2, 2012
asdf wrote:
<quoted text>
Then stop talking about how wrong I am and show me WHERE I was wrong and what I omitted. Just because you say it doesn't make it true. Tell us what I omitted.
==========
You omitted what shows ACA is not the scoundrel you painted it to be.

You didn't include all of the truth about penalties.

Same with how small business is effected.

Same with where an individual can obtain coverage.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#22193 Jul 2, 2012
asdf wrote:
<quoted text>
Where? I don't see it.
==========

Of course you don't. That's my point.
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22194 Jul 2, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>==========
You omitted what shows ACA is not the scoundrel you painted it to be.

You didn't include all of the truth about penalties.

Same with how small business is effected.

Same with where an individual can obtain coverage.
What did I omit?
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22195 Jul 2, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
<quoted text>Well the Billions insurance companies were overcharging people that had insurance is nothing to you huh, Heat? But add the word tax for you sits your hair on fire. The Affordable care act eventually will pay off what ever the start up costs are. All of your dire warning and complaints exactly match repubs when Social security and medicare were enacted.

Like I said 30 million people without insurance and citizens with pre-existing conditions that can't get it are just too bad.

But I'm not worried, President Obama is going to win over that elitist pansy boy Romney. And even if you Repubs win some seats in Congress we just have to filibuster whatever you put forward. Cause no way are Repubs ever getting a filibuster proof majority. Or those lovely secret holds that you guys specialize in.

Plus it's going to be hard for the party of the older white male to win election in the future no matter how much your billionaire owners try to buy if for you. But you have the whole disenfranchise voter thing going for you. But if your guys try to pull another Bush v Gore thing to steal the election, you might find a whole heck of lotta people revolting over that.
If this was a slam to ins companies, tell us, why aren't they pissed off and fighting Obamatax?? Bc they're making even more money off of this. My rates and everyone else I know went up at the beginning of this year and insurance companies know they're about to get 30 million new clients. Oh yeah, watching that money roll in must be soooo hard on those ins companies
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#22196 Jul 2, 2012
asdf wrote:
<quoted text>
If this was a slam to ins companies, tell us, why aren't they pissed off and fighting Obamatax?? Bc they're making even more money off of this. My rates and everyone else I know went up at the beginning of this year and insurance companies know they're about to get 30 million new clients. Oh yeah, watching that money roll in must be soooo hard on those ins companies
From the get go of Obamacare I have always wonder why the health insurance companies wasn't out fighting Obama care. Then when it was changed from the government totally running the healthcare program with making people think the government was out to break them to mandates everyone would buy healthcare and it actually was coming from the private health insurance companies. I honestly don't think these private companies are going to get hurt that much or at all. so who ever is laughing thinking Obamacare is screwing the private health insurance is not going to get the last laugh. Private insurance will along with the Democrats saying "we didn't and we did it our way."
asdf

Perkins, OK

#22197 Jul 2, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
<quoted text>From the get go of Obamacare I have always wonder why the health insurance companies wasn't out fighting Obama care. Then when it was changed from the government totally running the healthcare program with making people think the government was out to break them to mandates everyone would buy healthcare and it actually was coming from the private health insurance companies. I honestly don't think these private companies are going to get hurt that much or at all. so who ever is laughing thinking Obamacare is screwing the private health insurance is not going to get the last laugh. Private insurance will along with the Democrats saying "we didn't and we did it our way."
Yep until people can no longer afford the premiums and they have to drop it completely, pay the tax, and go without healthcare.

By the way, can someone tell me why I should have to pay for someone else's birth control and abortions when Planned Parenthood already does this with my tax money?
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#22198 Jul 2, 2012
asdf wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep until people can no longer afford the premiums and they have to drop it completely, pay the tax, and go without healthcare.
By the way, can someone tell me why I should have to pay for someone else's birth control and abortions when Planned Parenthood already does this with my tax money?
When you find out let me know. For awhile in my younger years insurance stopped pay for most birth control. The only time I feel abortion should be paid by insurance is when it is truly a heath problem but not for any that are being done as a birth control method. Most insurance including medicare's drug plans to donot cover allergy meds now. At one time they did but stopped. But if get a prescription from your doctor and are on Medicare even though they donot pay a dime for the meds it goes against your drug total. Go figure?
Packing Heat

United States

#22199 Jul 2, 2012
asdf wrote:
<quoted text>
My bet is the riots will start a few weeks before election time, fueled by libtards and Occutards (which are self admitted anarchists and communists) martial law will have to be implemented bc of it and elections suspended. You have to remember that these same people are the same ones that did all of this in Cairo and Libya, and have stated they want to make us Cairo. Worked out well for them with their new Muslim Brotherhood President huh?


If they do start before the elections that will only help Romney as it will show Liberals for who they really are. The fact is the Obamacare Tax will lead to more employers dropping medical insurance for their employees. Obamacare Tax actually gives employers incentives to drop out of providing medical insurance to their employees.

To pay the TAX is less than cost per employee covered. This will lead to even more employers dropping insurance and the taxpayer picking up more costs. Individuals will lose incentive to make prudent choices on healthcare costs because someone else will be paying for it therefore driving the cost up even more and making it harder to get in to see a Doctor.

Obamacare does not address in any way of lowering health insurance premiums and costs, but rather to take money from some and give it to others. Twenty new or higher taxes across the board are bad for economic growth, bad for job hiring, bad for investors, and bad for families. A tax is a tax anyway you say it. In other words, tax, spend, regulate, borrow. Bankrupting the economy is not exactly a job-creator.

As we get closer to November and unemployment climbs higher I believe that will help Romney get elected but we will just have to see how that plays out. If libtards think the Elite will just roll over and allow the Government to take their money then they will just have to find out the hard way, that will never happen. That is one of the reasons they are sitting on 2+ Trillion Dollars out of reach of the Government.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Okmulgee Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
rick mitchell (Jun '11) Sat Lolatu2003 54
PROTECTIVE ODERS most ABUSED in the Oklahoma JU... Feb 27 Professor of Law 2
Okmulgee Police (Nov '11) Feb 26 Just wondering 87
Allen & Wisner Feb 24 The Burbs 1
incubators Feb 22 egg lady 1
Sheriff: Okmulgee Man Connected To 2 Missing Be... Feb 22 grammernaughtzee 9
Charges Filed Against Okmulgee Public Officials (Sep '09) Feb 21 Quiznosmyplacecom 19
Okmulgee Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Okmulgee People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:02 am PST

NBC Sports 8:02AM
PFT Live: Panthers/Ravens offseason to-do lists
NBC Sports 8:24 AM
Justin Houston situation is about to get very interesting
NFL10:45 AM
Dallas Cowboys franchise tag Dez Bryant
ESPN11:02 AM
Source: Dez officially franchised by Cowboys
Bleacher Report11:05 AM
Report: Cowboys Put $12.823M Franchise Tag on Dez