A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

SCOTUS

Posted: Apr 2, 2012

I have a questions for the liberals here. I've heard some liberal talking heads state that they believe that if the SCOTUS rules all or part of ObamaCare unconstitutional that it would actually be a good thing for the Dems and Pres Obama. Do you agree?

On that same line of thinking, if the law is ruled constitutional, do you think it would be a good thing for the Republicans?

In other words, if you lose you win and if you win you also win. ??

;

I think that either way it will be a good thing - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
for the Obama campaign. If Obamacare is struck down the democrats will be enraged and the campaign energized. If the SCOTUS rules it is constitutional the dems will also be energized. Either way, good for the Obama campaign. It would have been far better for republicans if the Supreme Court had never been involved. JMHO.

Response from one liberal - who formerly

[ In Reply To ..]
posted frequently. I (and apparently others) have abandoned this board, only checking in now and then to see if activity remains low. It occured to me any message board is a money-making enterprise selling ads. Considering the blatant bias here - for instance, censoring a liberal for using the word "oar" (in a post regarding water) but allowing hateful posts towards liberals (often ending in Boo hoo, ha ha, and other simian vocalizations) to remain, I chose to post elsewhere. So, all the urban legend and tea party nonsense pretty much goes unread and unresponded to except for the like-minded. Save your catcalls for the first of next month when I might check in again.

I do not remember censoring any message with the word "oar" or water in it - Moderator

[ In Reply To ..]
I have been trying to get this board to a civil level, which is hard to do since both sides wants the other gone. Both are complaining the other side it hateful while they continue to post hateful remarks. It's hard to know where to draw the line. What do people consider freedom of expression and others consider hate. I'm trying to get rid of the hateful messages and name calling and I don't care care who is doing the name calling. I am not playing favorites to any side. If I read a hateful message or posters going after other posters I will delete it. Some posts I have deleted and sent messages to the posters telling them to keep their conversations on the topic at hand and stop going after other posters, but they have come back and continued to insult in between posts and are not happy they were told not to.

There is always going to be one side that blames the other feeling that only their side is censored while the other side can say what they want. That is not the case. I'm reading each post line by line trying to bring the conversation back to topics and remain civil towards each other. It doesn't matter which side it is on. This is a board for all sides to share ideas and talk about issues that are important.

Again, I do not know what post you are referring to me censing the word "oar". Very rarely have I deleted or edited a post and if I did it was because someone was calling other posters names. People can express their opinions regarding issues and politicians. I saw name calling of many politicians/news/commentators, etc. Unless something very bad was said to incite an argument on this board I have been letting people express their opinion. I didn't censor messages about Mr. Limbaugh, Mrs. Palin, Mr. Obama, etc. People are free to express how they feel about people and issues in politics. Unless it is outright liable or obscene I wasn't censoring.

Unless you direct me to the post you are referring to I do not know which one it is.

What about the blatant liberal bias - Guess you don't read many posts - SM

[ In Reply To ..]
and the brutal name-calling, insults, vulgarities posted by liberals. Libs just don't like it much when the mud they start slinging gets blown back on them.

You can't be part of the solution if you are - part of the problem..just sayin NM

[ In Reply To ..]
x

Just sayin ' that was the point being made - to the OP - SM

[ In Reply To ..]
Who could not make a simple statement without insulting everyone not sharing the viewpoint poster had. Accusing others of what he/she was posting.

sorry - goldie

[ In Reply To ..]

I'm sorry my post was interpreted as insulting. I honestly never meant to insult anyone. And then this comment, "save your catcalls for the first of next month when I might check in again" leaves me scratching my head. I still know what I said that hit a nerve, so to speak.

I was trying to understand how the rationale for a few of the talking heads saying that if the law is determined to be unconstitutional how it could be considered a "win" for the president. It was not meant to be anything than a simple question from me, trying to understand the mindset, that's all.

Again, I'm sorry if my post sounded offensive.

No need to be sorry - Conservative

[ In Reply To ..]
I enjoy your posts and find them quite informative. Do not see anything offensive about any of them. Guess there are some that just like to stir the pot! Keep posting; I read them every time I have a break even if I do not post anything. I appreciate the fact that you always write in such a polite manner on varied topics.

SCOTUS - Conservative

[ In Reply To ..]
Long term, I think it will benefit the Republicans. Hopefully, the mandate will be judged unconstitutional since it is. At that point, the reasonable beneficial aspects of the law can be developed. There is no reason why those opposed to abortion should be forced to pay for it with tax dollars. There is no reason why taxpayers should be forced to pay for illegals already breaking the law. There is no reason why the government should have access to any of your checking/savings account or any other financial information to determine what you are spending your money on. There is no reason why the sale of your house should result in an addl 3.8% tax under this law. There is no reason why the government should have any so-so about what goes on between you and your doctor or decide what "care" is best for you personally.

Once the garbage is gone, maybe they can get to the issue of opening up this market across state lines, torte reform and healthy competition that, in turns, benefits us all.

The only competition in health care should be...sm - IMHO

[ In Reply To ..]
a market where everyone has the same guaranteed basic insurance benefits and the hospitals are competing for patients. Nonprofit is the only way to go.

Don't agree - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

Why do repubs single out abortion as in what - you posted? SM

[ In Reply To ..]
We should not have to pay for abortion with our tax dollars? Hey, I am morally and religiously opposed to these wars we are in, yet my tax dollars help pay for them. I am outraged that I pay for subsidies to the oil industry. Does it have to be wrapped in religion to be valid? A person could go on and on with this type of thinking if we could actually see a breakdown of what our dollars pay for. I think the repubs know that the abortion argument is a big winner, they have campaigned on this issue for years. Could you explain further what the bill actually says about tax dollars being used to pay for abortion? I am not sure that this is actually in the bill. Thanks.

"Abortion argument is a big winner...." - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
They couldn't just stop at abortion. Now they're trying to ban contraception.

Also, I'd like to know who the "God" is that determined that life begins at conception. That is not only at odds with what the Constitution says, it's downright the opposite of "persons born or naturalized in the United States."

The determination of when life begins lies with each individual and his/her religious beliefs (or no religious beliefs if the person is an atheist) and his/her "God."

I agree with the Constitution, not with the people who are trying to wreck the Constitution.

Wrong argument - old and burned out

[ In Reply To ..]
Seems to me everyone is having the wrong argument as the issue of when life begins can never be solved. What is important is that when abortion is illegal, as in the past, unqualified abortionists proliferate and desperate women who see no way to support another child will go to them and many will die of a perforated uterus, sepsis, and many other consequences of an underground procedure. What then happens to the children they may already have who depend on them? This love affair with the fetus ignores the babies/children who are already here.

Trying to ban contraception? - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Truly amazed how liberals can turn the president attacking religious freedom and turing into republicans want to do away with contraception. Nice spin though. I would say that most republicans have no problem with contraception...myself included.

You have a president who hasn't passed a budget since he entered the WH...not even when his party controlled everything. A man who has spent our tax dollars on bust energy companies and wasted out money. A president who points his finger and blames everyone and yet never seems to have an actual plan of his own. He says he has a plan but then never gives details and goes on bashing others. I am truly amazed at the continual free passes liberals give this president. A man who went to law school and yet is pretty much threatening the supreme court saying how dare they question whether or not Obamacare is constitutional, etc. He should know better...he went to law school for goodness sake. A man who has spent trillions of dollars with very little if anything to show for it.

The liberals spun that whole anti contraception issue just to take the heat off of Obummer and his attack on Cahtolics...which Joe Biden even told Obama not to do...but whatever. Keep drinking that koolaid and following Obama blindly. If he gets re-elected for another 4 years and the economy doesn't get any better and/or we have a double dip....which I think we will....then who will ya'll blame? Republicans of course...what was I thinking. It will never be Obama's fault. Praise Obama!!!

threatening the supreme court - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
I cannot document your position. Where does the president express this?

Silly. No way to threaten them. They have a - lifetime position. nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

Silly. Holding is job is not the only way people are threatened - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
If you want an eye opener you should read about Chelsea.

Trying to ban contraception? - sm - Post nailed it on all levels

[ In Reply To ..]
Obama gets mores passes than a pro on payday (if you catch my drift.) Obama is throwing crap all over the place, hoping something will stick; so, no one looks at damage Obama has done to the economy, business, overe 5-trillion in debt, no budget and no ideas, crappy overseas relations, stunted job growth, illegal aliens, out of control border violence and the ENDLESS LIST DAMAGE GOES ON. NOTHING has improved since this idiot stepped into the White House including my paycheck. Four minutes of this idiot was four minutes too long, let alone four years.

Singled out - I am not a Republican - Conservative

[ In Reply To ..]
I am not a Republican; so, I cannot answer your question. Personally, as far as abortion goes, I am against that because it attacks a child at its' most vulnerable state and the child has absolutely no way to defend itself against its' own mother. It is in the Obamacare that abortions will be covered. I do not have the law directly in front of me to look up the page number, but you can pull up the entire law online and read as much or as little about that as your time permits. Very lengthy and also has to be corss referenced with other entries and laws that are too numerous to list here.

I'm not a liberal but I'll take a stab at your - Trigger Happy

[ In Reply To ..]
question and I won't even poke fun or be mean to you. ;)

I think this could potentially be a lose lose for both parties. If Obamacare is deemed unconstitutional, it most definitely won't look good for Obama because this is the only thing he has been able to accomplish. I think it could potentially backfire on republicans as well because there are a lot of independents who like Obamacare and obviously most...if not all...democrats do. If it is unconstitutional, many could see the republicans as keeping Americans from getting the insurance that they need...at least that is the way the democrats will spin it if this is overturned.

It is no secret that the republican presidential candidate will need independents to win against Obama. How many independents will run back to Obama if this is overturned and the republicans are blamed for it? Just a thought.

I would be happy if it were overturned. I believe healthcare should have some sort of reform but Obamacare was NOT the answer. I don't want government in my business...especially my healthcare business.

Medicare is run by the government. - me

[ In Reply To ..]
And my elderly parents couldn't imagine life without it. They love their government-run health care.

You can't have it both ways. If you don't - want government in SM

[ In Reply To ..]
your healthcare business, that should include staying out of decisions about contraception and terminating pregnancies. This should be between you and your doctor, period.

For the person who questioned repubs trying to outlaw contraception, you must not be paying attention. Have you heard of the personhood amendment? Stating that life becomes at fertilization of an egg with sperm, before the zygote has even attached to the uterine wall. This means any contraception preventing that (oral BCPs) would be outlawed. Pretty soon they will try to outlaw condoms, twisting it somehow to preventing life.

Just curious.....do you have kids of your own? - Trigger Happy

[ In Reply To ..]
I just know that when I found out I was pregnant, I didn't refer to it as a fetus or a glob of cells. It was my baby. When my sister-in-law miscarried, she didn't shrug it off and say...oh well....just a zygote and/or a bunch of cells. No biggie. Wrong...she cried...because it was her baby. She lost her BABY!!! A woman who is pregnant and is murdered is considered a DOUBLE murder. Not a murder and a termination of a zygote. No...it is a murder of 2 human beings.

You say I want it both ways. What about some of you. You talk about freedom of speech until someone disagrees with you and then you tell them to shut up. You talk about rights and yet many of you want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens. You want to stop the death penalty because it is cruel, but yet an abortion is no big deal.

I will admit that government does have a place in our lives...but not this much control. We elect them and they work for us...instead they are controlling more and more aspects of our lives.

As for doing away with contraception, I'm sure there is a small group that would be for that...but it would never pass because too many women...including some Catholics...use birth control.

As for your condom comment, that is just ignorant. Condoms not only prevent pregnancy but they also prevent the spread of STDs. So your snide comment doesn't hold water there.

Liberals are all about freedom and yet you can't see how much control our government has over us and the bigger it gets....the more control over our lives it has. Amazing how some of you don't get that.

Trigger Happy - without a doubt one of the best - Conservative

[ In Reply To ..]
posts I have ever seen on here so succintly supporting a baby from the time of conception. I have never heard any woman say I am having a zygote either...LOL. Sad that human life can take a back seat to so many other things in a liberal lifestyle.

Conservative - mbmt

[ In Reply To ..]
Why do you think that "human life takes a back seat" to other things in a liberal lifestyle? I am a liberal and am curious as to why you think that.

outlaws - goldie

[ In Reply To ..]

Do you honestly believe that the Republicans may try to outlaw condoms? Is that a part of the same old schtick we keep hearing? Let's see, so far we have the Republicans want:

1. Dirty air.

2. Dirty water.

3. Grandma thrown from the cliff.

4. African Amercians turned to back to slaves.

5. All birth control outlawed.

6. Sick children to die on the steps of the hospitals.

7. Sweatshops filled with 6-year-old children.

8. Poor people starved.

9. Start wars with every country on the planet.

10. No Medicare for anyone.

11. Unions destroyed and completely elimiated.

12. Steal money from the middle class and give to the rich.

I'm sure I've left out quite a few other things in their plan to completely destory America once they regain power. When is the fear mongering going to end? It's beginning to sound a little silly, don't you think? It reminds me of an episode of Pinky and the Brain.

Similar Messages:

Mar 28, 2012
Oyez! Oyez! Oyez! Is it just me or is anyone else bothered by the fact that there are no cameras allowed during the ObamaCare arguments? I know they never allow cameras in the SC and I think I understand why they don't --- in order to prevent any distractions with grandstanding and drama by the attorneys. That, and the fact they are the highest court in the land and most judges in this country are notoriously known for hating cameras. Even still, since this ruling w ...

Jun 26, 2012
in the ruling’s “wait-and-see” wording because these state laws have not yet been implemented the policies and lower court legal interpretations of that portion of the law have not been exhausted. After the initial “victory” boast in her official statement, Governor Brewer later channeled her inner candor in an interview, bemoaning how the victory had become “disgraceful,” (presumably based on her perception that SCOTUS had told AZ to ‘drop d ...

Jun 28, 2012
The exact quote is, “Just because a couple of people on the Supreme Court declare something to be 'constitutional' does not make it so." OMG. Is this the best the TP has to offer? Is this the same Tea Party whose platform is founded on the principle that, "The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and must be adhered to without exception at all levels of government?" One has to wonder if he has ever read it. Then he said, "The Tea P ...

Oct 15, 2014
while two separate actions challenging MD hospital admitting privilege requirements and costly reconstruction mandates make their way to the Supreme Court's doorsteps. Fogey Justices Scalia, Alito and Thomas were the only dissenting opinions. Those numbers are looking good. The day SCOTUS finally puts Texas tyranny to rest once and for all can't get here soon enough. ...

Jun 25, 2015
But maybe not for long. On what grounds would Obama dare to veto a bill that eliminates the exemption? ...

Nov 04, 2013
had been expanded to cover making all medical abortions in Oklahoma illegal, and the Supreme Court refused to accept it. ...

Aug 19, 2017
.. ...

Jun 27, 2014
Why is this one right, but not ACA or Roe V Wade? ...

Oct 23, 2016
I would never be able to explain my vote to my children down the road if I voted for more of what we've had for 8 years. ...