Author Topic: "Obamacare" (Read 324022 times)

Emo EMAW · « **Reply #2600 on:** September 29, 2016, 03:20:51 PM »

Quote from: sys on September 29, 2016, 03:13:17 PM

there's actually no constitutional right to arrow elk. in fact, the founders, in their infinite wisdom, specifically refrained from outlining any right to hunt animals in colorado at all.

19 states currently guarantee the right to hunt. Colorado isn't one of them, but several western states are included.

sys · « **Reply #2601 on:** September 29, 2016, 03:21:20 PM »

Quote from: Mrs. Gooch on September 29, 2016, 03:14:55 PM

I think that falls under the pursuit of happiness or something.

not in the constitution either!

sys · « **Reply #2602 on:** September 29, 2016, 03:22:21 PM »

Quote from: Emo EMAW on September 29, 2016, 03:20:51 PM

19 states currently guarantee the right to hunt. Colorado isn't one of them, but several western states are included.

that's cute. not in the constitution.

Emo EMAW · « **Reply #2603 on:** September 29, 2016, 03:24:51 PM »

Quote from: sys on September 29, 2016, 03:22:21 PM

Quote from: Emo EMAW on September 29, 2016, 03:20:51 PM
19 states currently guarantee the right to hunt. Colorado isn't one of them, but several western states are included.

that's cute. not in the constitution.

The Constitution specifically defines that the states are sovereign.

sys · « **Reply #2604 on:** September 29, 2016, 03:28:20 PM »

i think we can agree that the constitution doesn't prohibit arrowing elk in colorado. i'll have to check and see if govt supported health care is outlawed.

Mrs. Gooch · « **Reply #2605 on:** September 29, 2016, 03:31:12 PM »

Quote from: Cartierfor3 on September 29, 2016, 02:17:58 PM

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on September 29, 2016, 02:17:06 PM
i didn't but i think life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness apply bruh

not the constitution

Life & liberty actually are in the constitution

DQ12 · « **Reply #2606 on:** September 29, 2016, 03:51:32 PM »

individual rights are in a different constitutional universe than what the federal government is permitted to do.

renocat · « **Reply #2607 on:** September 30, 2016, 10:21:03 AM »

I just read the Drudge Report. There was an article about Obama circumventing the wishes of Congress using legal tactics. Congress has voted not appropriate money to subsidize the health exchanges. Obama is arguing that the federal government has a contract with insurers to subsidize them. So he is encouraging them 2 file a lawsuit demanding payment. There is some obscure program in the Department of Treasury that can be used to pay any lawsuits brought against the federal government. The plan is to negotiate a settlement. This program has no limit on what it can pay out. So much for representative government.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #2608 on:** September 30, 2016, 11:32:28 AM »

Guaranteeing a right to "health care" is as stupid as guaranteeing a right to "education" (hello Kansas). It's a subjective and immeasurable standard subject to unending challenge. Do income taxes infringe on your right to earn a living? Absolutely, but what the eff does that mean?

star seed 7 · « **Reply #2609 on:** September 30, 2016, 11:34:26 AM »

Good point fsd, we should give free college too

CNS · « **Reply #2610 on:** September 30, 2016, 11:36:41 AM »

Having a bunch of unhealthy idiots running around the country seems like a worse idea

Emo EMAW · « **Reply #2611 on:** September 30, 2016, 12:03:34 PM »

Quote from: CNS on September 30, 2016, 11:36:41 AM

Having a bunch of unhealthy idiots running around the country seems like a worse idea

It's where we are now so...

CNS · « **Reply #2612 on:** September 30, 2016, 12:11:38 PM »

...and the country is nominating Trump to shake things up because ppl are dissatisfied.

Emo EMAW · « **Reply #2613 on:** September 30, 2016, 12:20:03 PM »

I think one thing people are dissatisfied over is Obamacare.

CNS · « **Reply #2614 on:** September 30, 2016, 12:55:28 PM »

I think many ppl are too big of an idiot to have taken the time to nail down why they are so mad, then they simply emotionally attach to the anger of a seemingly strong personality then parrot whatevs that idiot says.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Emo EMAW · « **Reply #2615 on:** September 30, 2016, 01:01:34 PM »

I think there are some people that were justifiably angry in 2010 before they even could have considered that Donald Trump would be running for office in 2016.

CNS · « **Reply #2616 on:** September 30, 2016, 01:22:05 PM »

Sure. There were plenty of angry idiots in Congress and local politics back then, and according to a bunch of pubs, the voters in question stayed at home last pres election. I assume that Romney wasn't an angry enough idiot.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

Kat Kid · « **Reply #2617 on:** September 30, 2016, 01:23:28 PM »

Quote from: Emo EMAW on September 30, 2016, 01:01:34 PM

I think there are some people that were justifiably angry in 2010 before they even could have considered that Donald Trump would be running for office in 2016.

what was justified about their anger? My health insurance is getting worse, but that is because Kansas State has had to make across the board cuts for the past 3 years because of Brownback's tax plan.

Emo EMAW · « **Reply #2618 on:** September 30, 2016, 03:00:20 PM »

Quote from: Kat Kid on September 30, 2016, 01:23:28 PM

Quote from: Emo EMAW on September 30, 2016, 01:01:34 PM
I think there are some people that were justifiably angry in 2010 before they even could have considered that Donald Trump would be running for office in 2016.

what was justified about their anger? My health insurance is getting worse, but that is because Kansas State has had to make across the board cuts for the past 3 years because of Brownback's tax plan.

I think it's justifiable to be angry about being promised transparency and then this massive bill being written behind closed doors and voted on by people who didn't even understand what all was in it.

MakeItRain · « **Reply #2619 on:** October 05, 2016, 10:39:25 PM »

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/10/05/couple-billed-3935-hold-newborn-son/91600274/

SMDH, let's not worry about price controls though

star seed 7 · « **Reply #2620 on:** October 05, 2016, 10:42:49 PM »

Did you not read why?

MakeItRain · « **Reply #2621 on:** October 05, 2016, 10:48:28 PM »

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on October 05, 2016, 10:42:49 PM

Did you not read why?

Yeah I read why, and that's rough ridin' stupid and shameful. Do you think it is SOP to charge for that? I can tell you from firsthand experience that it isn't.

Tobias · « **Reply #2622 on:** October 05, 2016, 10:51:37 PM »

Quote

the nurse asked my wife if she would like to do skin to skin

like, that's the commonly used phrase?

star seed 7 · « **Reply #2623 on:** October 05, 2016, 10:56:18 PM »

Quote from: MakeItRain on October 05, 2016, 10:48:28 PM

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on October 05, 2016, 10:42:49 PM
Did you not read why?

Yeah I read why, and that's rough ridin' stupid and shameful. Do you think it is SOP to charge for that? I can tell you from firsthand experience that it isn't.

I saw the reddit thread yesterday and there were a crap load of people saying it is standard,but maybe they were lying

star seed 7 · « **Reply #2624 on:** October 05, 2016, 10:57:04 PM »

Quote from: Tobias on October 05, 2016, 10:51:37 PM

Quote
the nurse asked my wife if she would like to do skin to skin

Apparently yes

like, that's the commonly used phrase?