If Health Law Is Overturned, What Wil...

If Health Law Is Overturned, What Will Liberals Do?

There are 4937 comments on the thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com story from Mar 28, 2012, titled If Health Law Is Overturned, What Will Liberals Do?. In it, thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com reports that:

If the Supreme Court strikes down all or part of President Obama 's health care law , it will have unraveled a legislative compromise that many liberals had viewed with suspicion from the beginning.

In one of the ironies of recent politics, Mr. Obama was a late convert to the merits of the individual mandate that now appears to be in danger of being declared unconstitutional.

But the president’s embrace of the mandate — and his willingness to abandon a so-called public option to get a health care deal — was a hard pill to swallow for many of his Democratic supporters.

The Affordable Care Act promises to provide health insurance to millions who lacked it. But it also stops far short of the idea that health care is a basic right for everyone living in the country. And it embraces the market-based system of private health care delivery that has long existed in America.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com.

Churmudgeon

Bexar, AR

#3679 Jul 3, 2012
OzRitz wrote:
So yeah, we should be having an Independance day as well but I doubt if i will see it in my lifetime. Until the English component is far removed from the genetic makeup of the population it won't happen.
As far as I'm concerned we have been screwed by the English from colony days right through to war time. Using our troops for canon fodder in WW1 and the same in WW2 when all our troops were in Europe fighting for them they abandoned Singapore and left us to be taken over by the Japanese. Same as when they joined the Euro's our rural exports stopped overnight. Farmers ploughing fruit trees into the ground etc because we supplied them with everything from butter , meat, fruit etc. So when the US forces came to drive the Japanese back from a near invasion. We have been grateful ever since, so follow you into every crap conflict ever since, no matter if we believe in the cause or not. From Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afgansitan etc and it doesn't matter whether left or right government is in power. I know first hand because i was a Vietnam draftee and you would watch your birthday come up on TV, it was run like a lottery draw. If your birthday number came out of the barrel, pack your bags, shave your hair, you are in the army son.:)
Many years ago I went to england to look at stonehenge the dover cliff ect. Then I went to cornwall. The sighn where it stated cornwall england was painted over. A crude sighn was there that stated cornwall is not england, I stayed with a old couple in cornwall that night. The old man began asking about my guns. I told him and we talked then he got out a old webly revolver He stated he was supposed to turn it in but he couldnt do it. His ammunition was green it was so old.
Churmudgeon

Bexar, AR

#3680 Jul 3, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Your system of government is exactly what we are trying to avoid here. We tried getting rid of guns for years. The results were more crime being committed by criminals because they then had the upper hand against the honest citizen with no firearms to protect themselves. In other words, it didn't work because after decades of trial, we learned that criminals don't obey the law. That's why they are criminals in the first place.
State by state, we started to reverse the trend. More and more descent, honest, law biding citizens began to carry guns. The results were less assaults, murders and firearm related attacks. Perfect? Not at all, but much better.
We are a very diverse country where some sectors of people are much more prone to violence than others. This leaves the less prone groups as victims. Our criminals don't fear penalties because our prisons have: workout rooms, libraries, internet access, football fields, three square meals a day plus snacks, and a nice little room for when your wife visits and you want to start a family. We have the same thing in the free world, but we call them "get away weekends" and we have to pay for them.
Since the liberal push for these prison amenities, we now have the highest percentage of our population behind bars compared to the rest of the industrialized world. Therefore, because the criminals have no fear of our police, our prison system, and even the ultimate sentence which is death (which takes about 20 years to carry out) citizens have to protect themselves.
I can trace my ancestory on one side to a fellow who fought with william the conquer at the battle of hastings. Im a decendant of the Huntington who sighned the declariation of independence. On the other I couldnt get any farther than the bastard offspring daughter of a chinese prostitue in deadwood dakota and her union with the son a blackfeet & piaute woman who was married to a buffalo soldier. So im a mongrel. But I love my country and am dismayed at the direction it headed.
Churmudgeon

Bexar, AR

#3681 Jul 3, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>you wont get Romney to see that way instead Romney would prefer to tax guns out of reach of the law bidding citizens so they could not protect themselves and he is in lock & step with that same bunch of gun grabbers.
So we are dammed if we do and dammed if we dont? F##### up mess!!!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#3682 Jul 3, 2012
Guns are part of a culture, not a necessity as you try to make out. So what you are really defending is a culture not some logical reason because for every stat you dig up someone will find the opposite.
Take Japan for instance because they have such a disciplined culture crime rates are relatively low. A women can walk the streets at night in most places knowing it would be rare to be assualted. Here our culture is sport, so stupid things like a horse race each year stops the nation. The Melbourne cup, every office , workplace, even in school class rooms stop to watch that one horse race every year. So when the government says we can't have guns we dont give a stuff but if they said you can't watch that race any more watch what would happen. Same as the Olympics, you could go to any outback town in the middle of nowhere. The streets be deserted and walk into a local hotel and find the whole damn town inside watching a swimming race if an Australian was in it. That is just part of our culture which we value with much more reverance than carrying a gun or these so called percieved freedoms you talk about. So how each develops I have no idea, all i know that's how it is. I wonder if your kids will defend the right to carry guns in the future or their kids. I suspect that will fade as time goes on an generations change.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3683 Jul 3, 2012
Churmudgeon wrote:
<quoted text> So we are dammed if we do and dammed if we dont? F##### up mess!!!
exactly, Romney for the simple fact because he has proven it can be done and did it in Massachusetts with the taxes on the gun owners and with Romneycare and is why the Liberal movement wanted Romney to be the nominee.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#3684 Jul 3, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>you wont get Romney to see that way instead Romney would prefer to tax guns out of reach of the law bidding citizens so they could not protect themselves and he is in lock & step with that same bunch of gun grabbers.
If that is true (and I doubt it will be) then he will be a one term President, and perhaps even face a primary opponent on the Republican side for he second term.

Most of the gun laws passed here in Ohio happened under the signature of liberal Governor Ted Strickland. It's not that he was a gun advocate, it's just that he knew what lines he should not cross. Most politicians realize where the line is.

Self-protection has become a major issue in this country regardless of how liberal or conservative a state or city is. Only a representative desiring political suicide would dare to mess with us gun people. So I fail to see how your prediction could come true. After all, DumBama and the Democrats had plenty of time to pass anti-gun legislation, and even they knew the risk of political suicide.

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#3685 Jul 3, 2012
OzRitz wrote:
Guns are part of a culture, not a necessity as you try to make out. So what you are really defending is a culture not some logical reason because for every stat you dig up someone will find the opposite.
Take Japan for instance because they have such a disciplined culture crime rates are relatively low. A women can walk the streets at night in most places knowing it would be rare to be assualted. Here our culture is sport, so stupid things like a horse race each year stops the nation. The Melbourne cup, every office , workplace, even in school class rooms stop to watch that one horse race every year. So when the government says we can't have guns we dont give a stuff but if they said you can't watch that race any more watch what would happen. Same as the Olympics, you could go to any outback town in the middle of nowhere. The streets be deserted and walk into a local hotel and find the whole damn town inside watching a swimming race if an Australian was in it. That is just part of our culture which we value with much more reverance than carrying a gun or these so called percieved freedoms you talk about. So how each develops I have no idea, all i know that's how it is. I wonder if your kids will defend the right to carry guns in the future or their kids. I suspect that will fade as time goes on an generations change.
Guns may be part of our culture, but they are necessary. The second amendment plainly states that they are necessary.
As for your examples, look at Kennesaw Georgia. It lies on the outskirts of Atlanta which is always among the top crime rates in the country. But Kennesaw is among the lowest crime rates in the country. Why? Because heads of household in Kennesaw are required to posses a firearm and suitable ammunition for it.

http://www.wnd.com/2007/04/41196/

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#3686 Jul 3, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>exactly, Romney for the simple fact because he has proven it can be done and did it in Massachusetts with the taxes on the gun owners and with Romneycare and is why the Liberal movement wanted Romney to be the nominee.
Yep.
Churmudgeon

Bexar, AR

#3687 Jul 3, 2012
OzRitz wrote:
Guns are part of a culture, not a necessity as you try to make out. So what you are really defending is a culture not some logical reason because for every stat you dig up someone will find the opposite.
Take Japan for instance because they have such a disciplined culture crime rates are relatively low. A women can walk the streets at night in most places knowing it would be rare to be assualted. Here our culture is sport, so stupid things like a horse race each year stops the nation. The Melbourne cup, every office , workplace, even in school class rooms stop to watch that one horse race every year. So when the government says we can't have guns we dont give a stuff but if they said you can't watch that race any more watch what would happen. Same as the Olympics, you could go to any outback town in the middle of nowhere. The streets be deserted and walk into a local hotel and find the whole damn town inside watching a swimming race if an Australian was in it. That is just part of our culture which we value with much more reverance than carrying a gun or these so called percieved freedoms you talk about. So how each develops I have no idea, all i know that's how it is. I wonder if your kids will defend the right to carry guns in the future or their kids. I suspect that will fade as time goes on an generations change.
My children & grandchildren have more guns than I do. The amount and kind of weapons & ammunition in the hands of the american citizens is unbeliveable. Any canditate In my area who is anti gun and tips their hand is commiting political sucicide.
Churmudgeon

Bexar, AR

#3689 Jul 3, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
If that is true (and I doubt it will be) then he will be a one term President, and perhaps even face a primary opponent on the Republican side for he second term.
Most of the gun laws passed here in Ohio happened under the signature of liberal Governor Ted Strickland. It's not that he was a gun advocate, it's just that he knew what lines he should not cross. Most politicians realize where the line is.
Self-protection has become a major issue in this country regardless of how liberal or conservative a state or city is. Only a representative desiring political suicide would dare to mess with us gun people. So I fail to see how your prediction could come true. After all, DumBama and the Democrats had plenty of time to pass anti-gun legislation, and even they knew the risk of political suicide.
Yes it seems Obama and the other liberals didnt want to touch any gun issues even witj a ten foot pole.
Churmudgeon

Bexar, AR

#3690 Jul 3, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>exactly, Romney for the simple fact because he has proven it can be done and did it in Massachusetts with the taxes on the gun owners and with Romneycare and is why the Liberal movement wanted Romney to be the nominee.
That will never work. Because we already have the guns & ammo. And many guns are bought & sold in private transactions. Many sold at gun shows. There is a thriving black market for anything when it becomes excessively taxed.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3691 Jul 3, 2012
Churmudgeon wrote:
<quoted text> That will never work. Because we already have the guns & ammo. And many guns are bought & sold in private transactions. Many sold at gun shows. There is a thriving black market for anything when it becomes excessively taxed.
I know what your saying there too.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#3692 Jul 3, 2012
OzRitz wrote:
Guns are part of a culture, not a necessity as you try to make out. So what you are really defending is a culture not some logical reason because for every stat you dig up someone will find the opposite.
Take Japan for instance because they have such a disciplined culture crime rates are relatively low. A women can walk the streets at night in most places knowing it would be rare to be assualted. Here our culture is sport, so stupid things like a horse race each year stops the nation. The Melbourne cup, every office , workplace, even in school class rooms stop to watch that one horse race every year. So when the government says we can't have guns we dont give a stuff but if they said you can't watch that race any more watch what would happen. Same as the Olympics, you could go to any outback town in the middle of nowhere. The streets be deserted and walk into a local hotel and find the whole damn town inside watching a swimming race if an Australian was in it. That is just part of our culture which we value with much more reverance than carrying a gun or these so called percieved freedoms you talk about. So how each develops I have no idea, all i know that's how it is. I wonder if your kids will defend the right to carry guns in the future or their kids. I suspect that will fade as time goes on an generations change.
The real problem in our country is our government. They insist on mixing cultures. People of different races can live together, but people of different cultures cannot. Our federal government never learned that if you take 3/4 cup of fresh wholesome milk, and mix that with 1/4 stale sour milk, you only have one thing: a cup of bad milk.

I grew up in a suburb of one race and one culture. Nobody had a gun or needed one for that matter. You could walk the streets anytime day or night. I didn't own a gun until my apartment was robbed and my door broken down. It was then I realized how defenseless I was.

Now that the federal government inserted people of different race and culture into my neighborhood, I have no choice but to arm myself. It would be foolish not to. I would gladly surrender my firearm if government had some way to protect me, but they don't. Instead, they keep advancing their failed social experimentation as if to expect different results.

I cannot rent to who I wish to. I cannot sell my home to who I wish to. I have to abide to "fair housing" standards that force me to sell or rent to people I know will be trouble for my city and environment. So the realty is, I am forced to carry my firearm because of the federal government. Take federal government away and allow is to preserve our neighborhoods, who would need a gun?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3693 Jul 3, 2012
Churmudgeon wrote:
<quoted text> Yes it seems Obama and the other liberals didnt want to touch any gun issues even witj a ten foot pole.
Obama one day on the News, I watch him in a speech and he told the reporter that he is not after anyones guns which I think was last year right after the SCOTUS ruled in Mcdonald Vs Chicago. But I know about 2 months ago Bill Clinton came out and was upset that Obama hasnt went after the gun issue which really bothered Clinton, which I figured that is why Clinton came out for Romeny, Romney should pick Bill Clinton as his VP nominee, those two are just alike politically and Liberal movement would just love that Idea.

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#3694 Jul 3, 2012
Churmudgeon wrote:
<quoted text>So we are dammed if we do and dammed if we dont? F##### up mess!!!
That about sums it up.
Churmudgeon

Bexar, AR

#3695 Jul 3, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
The real problem in our country is our government. They insist on mixing cultures. People of different races can live together, but people of different cultures cannot. Our federal government never learned that if you take 3/4 cup of fresh wholesome milk, and mix that with 1/4 stale sour milk, you only have one thing: a cup of bad milk.
I grew up in a suburb of one race and one culture. Nobody had a gun or needed one for that matter. You could walk the streets anytime day or night. I didn't own a gun until my apartment was robbed and my door broken down. It was then I realized how defenseless I was.
Now that the federal government inserted people of different race and culture into my neighborhood, I have no choice but to arm myself. It would be foolish not to. I would gladly surrender my firearm if government had some way to protect me, but they don't. Instead, they keep advancing their failed social experimentation as if to expect different results.
I cannot rent to who I wish to. I cannot sell my home to who I wish to. I have to abide to "fair housing" standards that force me to sell or rent to people I know will be trouble for my city and environment. So the realty is, I am forced to carry my firearm because of the federal government. Take federal government away and allow is to preserve our neighborhoods, who would need a gun?
For me a gun is a necessity. I need a gun to kill predators that would kill my poultry & livestock. i need a gunfor hunting wich along with providing meat helps keep the deer and other animal populations in check. But mostly I think we all need our guns as deterrent to keep the goverment in check. In not paranoid but I dont trust the goverment. It think our elected represenatives are putting the UN and NWO agenda ahead of what is best for the US citizens who elected them.
Churmudgeon

Bexar, AR

#3696 Jul 3, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Obama one day on the News, I watch him in a speech and he told the reporter that he is not after anyones guns which I think was last year right after the SCOTUS ruled in Mcdonald Vs Chicago. But I know about 2 months ago Bill Clinton came out and was upset that Obama hasnt went after the gun issue which really bothered Clinton, which I figured that is why Clinton came out for Romeny, Romney should pick Bill Clinton as his VP nominee, those two are just alike politically and Liberal movement would just love that Idea.
Hillary could have run as a independent and picked bill as her running mate and easily won.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3697 Jul 3, 2012
Churmudgeon wrote:
<quoted text> For me a gun is a necessity. I need a gun to kill predators that would kill my poultry & livestock. i need a gunfor hunting wich along with providing meat helps keep the deer and other animal populations in check. But mostly I think we all need our guns as deterrent to keep the goverment in check. In not paranoid but I dont trust the goverment. It think our elected represenatives are putting the UN and NWO agenda ahead of what is best for the US citizens who elected them.
some city dwellers dont see a gun as a necessity and dont understand why or comprehend what rural area living is like and when you explain it to some of them city dwellers they think your nuts.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3698 Jul 3, 2012
Churmudgeon wrote:
<quoted text> Hillary could have run as a independent and picked bill as her running mate and easily won.
I believe it too.
Obamapocolypse

San Jose, CA

#3699 Jul 3, 2012
It's definitely not the guns that are the problem as we all know it's the one pulling the trigger foolishly, therefore guns will always be a tradition of America. I for one never owned a real gun except for a bebe gun as a young boy and that was decades ago, but the thought of owning a gun has never crossed my mind, yet I respect folk's who own them for hopefully good reasons and of course our freedom to exercise the right to bear arms in USA and even though I don't believe i'll ever own or use a gun ever it makes me feel secure knowing we as Americans can bear arms for protection, especially if the government decides to go postal on us poor Americans I definitely want to be next or behind my fellow American defending us against the enemy, and I hope and pray to God our own US government doesn't turn on its own people because of the division in this courntry now that Obama with his Obamacare has created which the majority of Americans don't want.

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.

Health Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Important vaccines that should not be missed by... 10 hr Sandra 2
News Pregnancy Symptoms - 12 Very Early Symptoms of ... (Jun '07) 12 hr Didi Pierce 7,168
News Gay Men Less Likely to Have Safe Sex Now: Survey 18 hr Dandy Randy 18
Boost Your Bust - How To Make Your Breasts Grow... (Mar '14) 19 hr Lovefit 13
News Bill would more than triple Nebraska's cigarett... Sat Say What 3
News GOP Gov: Brewer Defends Medicaid Expansion: 'We... (Jun '13) Fri Obamas Powerful Gun 42
News A winner in GOP plans to repeal Obamacare: tann... Fri Dee Dee Dee 2
More from around the web