The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Gun Dog Broker
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 77

Thread: Obamacare, what says the Constitution?

  1. #51
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nor_Cal_Angler View Post
    Yardly,

    Again, I say based on this bill's own wording I am striped of my Freedom of Choice!!!!!!!!!!

    You again cited the "fact" that individuals (and employers) would be REQUIRED to purchase a "qualified" plan or "pay a tax" essentially a PENILITY.

    ...
    I don't disagree with you at all. The bill forces each of us to carry a minimum level of health insurance or to pay a penalty. That is what universal coverage means.

    This is not really a philosophical issue about freedom. Governments are created explicitly to enforce a common will on everyone -- based hopefully on decisions by the majority or their representatives -- and by doing so they inherently constrain the freedom of all. If a road is built, I am forced to help pay for it and if it is built in my backyard I must suffer the damage to the value of m property in the name of the common good. While there may be programs to compensate me, my freedom is limited.

    As a citizen, I have the right and freedom to express my opinions and to vote for my representatives. I don't have the right to demand others to support my positions and I don't have the right to have my candidates for office win. I am not more free because my candidates win nor less free when they lose. My right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is forever exercised within the boundaries adopted by the common will within the law.

  2. #52
    Senior Member Nor_Cal_Angler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburg, Ca
    Posts
    655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    I don't disagree with you at all. The bill forces each of us to carry a minimum level of health insurance or to pay a penalty. That is what universal coverage means.

    This is not really a philosophical issue about freedom. Governments are created explicitly to enforce a common will on everyone -- based hopefully on decisions by the majority or their representatives -- and by doing so they inherently constrain the freedom of all. If a road is built, I am forced to help pay for it and if it is built in my backyard I must suffer the damage to the value of m property in the name of the common good. While there may be programs to compensate me, my freedom is limited.

    As a citizen, I have the right and freedom to express my opinions and to vote for my representatives. I don't have the right to demand others to support my positions and I don't have the right to have my candidates for office win. I am not more free because my candidates win nor less free when they lose. My right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is forever exercised within the boundaries adopted by the common will within the law.
    Thank you, thank you, thank you...

    "Governments are created explicitly to enforce a common will on everyone"

    nope....NOT OURS....your reference to "Governments" supposes that your including other systems. Sorry pal, not the United States of America...this Government (singular) was not founded to enforce a will on THE PEOPLE.

    "based hopefully on decisions by the majority or their representatives"

    nope....NOT OURS...BASED SOLELY on the decisions by the MAJORITY of the PEOPLE.


    And your last whole paragraph.....

    This is the problem....I agree with you whole heartedly, and yet as the MAJORITY of americans are up in arms about this healthcare issue and EVERY POLL out shows that people are NOT IN FAVOR of it. Our ELECTED represenatives are (hold on, stop the press, guess what) CHOOSING to ignore us and swear up and down that this is going to get passed.....

    So re-read your last paragraph and explain how you say..."I DONT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEMAND OTHERS TO SUPPORT MY DECISIONS" and yet your in favor of ME supporting you. Cake and eat it to much????

    The way I read your whole last paragraph, it seems to be a contradiciton to your stated opinions on the subject matter....you say "My right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is forever exercised within the boundaries adopted by the common will within the law"

    How is the common will (your implying the PEOPLES WILL) going to prevail when our reps wont acknowledge our will...

    NCA

    Ps...based upon your last paragraph...do you struggle to sleep at night with the internal battle you must be having.

  3. #53
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,558

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nor_Cal_Angler View Post
    Ps...based upon your last paragraph...do you struggle to sleep at night with the internal battle you must be having.
    I think you should read his last paragraph a couple more times. I think there is a small chance that you misunderstood what he was saying.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  4. #54
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nor_Cal_Angler View Post
    Thank you, thank you, thank you...

    "Governments are created explicitly to enforce a common will on everyone"

    nope....NOT OURS....your reference to "Governments" supposes that your including other systems. Sorry pal, not the United States of America...this Government (singular) was not founded to enforce a will on THE PEOPLE.

    "based hopefully on decisions by the majority or their representatives"

    nope....NOT OURS...BASED SOLELY on the decisions by the MAJORITY of the PEOPLE.


    And your last whole paragraph.....

    This is the problem....I agree with you whole heartedly, and yet as the MAJORITY of americans are up in arms about this healthcare issue and EVERY POLL out shows that people are NOT IN FAVOR of it. Our ELECTED represenatives are (hold on, stop the press, guess what) CHOOSING to ignore us and swear up and down that this is going to get passed.....

    So re-read your last paragraph and explain how you say..."I DONT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEMAND OTHERS TO SUPPORT MY DECISIONS" and yet your in favor of ME supporting you. Cake and eat it to much????

    The way I read your whole last paragraph, it seems to be a contradiciton to your stated opinions on the subject matter....you say "My right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is forever exercised within the boundaries adopted by the common will within the law"

    How is the common will (your implying the PEOPLES WILL) going to prevail when our reps wont acknowledge our will...

    NCA

    Ps...based upon your last paragraph...do you struggle to sleep at night with the internal battle you must be having.
    The preamble to our Constitution reads:

    "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." That is, it is all about the common wealth of the population. As is more typically pointed out by conservative commentators, we do not live in a democracy, but a representative republic. Representatives are elected and act under the Constitution to pass laws and adopt taxes that affect all of us. What is a law but an effort to enforce common standards of behavior on each of us consistent with the will of the "people" as expressed by their representatives? Every law limits freedom. Hopefully, the benefits of the law warrant that limitation.

    With respect to my last paragraph, I don't see the contradiction. The proposed bills would definitely reduce your freedom by compelling you to have health insurance coverage. That is what you said and I agree. The question before Congress is whether or not our representatives believe that the benefits of the bills warrant that restriction. I believe they do. You believe they don't. My point is that in a representative democracy or republic we participate in the decision making by how we cast our votes in elections. The government is representative or not based on how it is elected, not what decisions it makes. If it strays too far from the will of the people, it will lose support in the next election. As a citizen, I have the right (and responsibility) to vote. After that, whether my candidate wins or loses, I am represented by the victors.

    As polls prove, the will of the people changes frequently, but only the votes count. This is a fact that Bush proved repeatedly as he continued to govern effectively (not well) despite massive disapproval of his presidency. The health plan under discussion now was a central issue throughout the 2008 elections. The people who won the election in a major victory were those supporting the types of changes now being considered. Why do you think they would abandon that support now? In 2000, Bush lost the popular vote and only took office by the will of the Supreme Court. He ran on a platform of massive tax cuts and pushed those tax cuts through using special provisions of senate rules to avoid the need for a 60 vote majority. Those tax cuts increased our deficit by about six times the increase estimated for the Obama health plan. I did not support those cuts, although I benefited from them. However, given Bush's campaign, I was not at all surprised by the fact that he used every possible trick, including deliberately concealing the true cost, to force them through.

  5. #55
    Senior Member Nor_Cal_Angler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburg, Ca
    Posts
    655

    Default

    "I was not at all surprised by the fact that he used every possible trick, including deliberately concealing the true cost, to force them through."


    I thought you wanted CHANGE....hmmmmmm

    NCA

  6. #56
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nor_Cal_Angler View Post
    "I was not at all surprised by the fact that he used every possible trick, including deliberately concealing the true cost, to force them through."


    I thought you wanted CHANGE....hmmmmmm

    NCA
    Not the kind of change that says to pretend like you didn't win the election. Bi-partisanship only works when both sides are prepared to move towards the middle and accept that the best measure of the middle comes from the results of the election. Clearly that is not working and won't work on health care unless Republicans are prepared to define conditions under which they will actually vote in favor of a plan providing virtually universal coverage instead of simply demonizing everything proposed. If that position persists, I personally hope that the administration proceeds even if it receives no support at all from the Republicans. In that case it is politically necessary to pass a bill before campaigning for the 2010 elections moves into full gear.

  7. #57
    Senior Member Bob Gutermuth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Transchoptankia, DEMOCRATIC Peoples Republic of Maryland
    Posts
    3,065

    Default

    If they pass osamacare over the objections of the GOP, the left won't have to worry about the off year elections, they will get their clocks cleaned.
    Bob Gutermuth
    Canvasback Chesapeakes
    ROLL TIDE!

  8. #58
    Senior Member dnf777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Western Pa
    Posts
    6,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Gutermuth View Post
    If they pass osamacare over the objections of the GOP, the left won't have to worry about the off year elections, they will get their clocks cleaned.
    From where Obama stood during the campaign, he has given up single-payer, end of life counselling provisions, and most recently any public option in the effort to gain bipartisanship. What have the republicans given up?

    As and independent, all I've seen from the right is lies, distortions, and nazi-baiting name calling. None of which is legitimate debate or compromise. The "death panels" are a prime example of how the far right has squandered its credibility on this issue. Like I've said before, there is plenty of legitimate debate that needs to occur. Can't we dispense with the distortions and name calling?
    God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!

  9. #59
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Gutermuth View Post
    If they pass osamacare over the objections of the GOP, the left won't have to worry about the off year elections, they will get their clocks cleaned.
    If he fails to pass legislation because of his efforts to obtain Republican support, he will face the same problem. I see no evidence that Republicans are likely to do anything except attempt delays unless Democrats agree to a program relying almost exclusively on tax credits as a vehicle to reduce the cost of employer subsidized insurance. I view that as a complete waste of money that will result not be supported by a majority from either party. Pass a bill fast and work to make the program a success.

    If Democrats go into the next election with declining unemployment, rising housing sales, moderate economic growth, a stable to growing stock market, and having passed a health program, they will probably lose at most a few seats. If nothing passes, Democrats will lose big even if the economy is improving. That is the political calculus now driving both sides and every Republican effort is focused on delaying any action long enough to prevent passage prior to the 2010 elections.

  10. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Gutermuth View Post
    If they pass osamacare over the objections of the GOP, the left won't have to worry about the off year elections, they will get their clocks cleaned.
    Hey Bob, why don't we use the health care plan W put through Congress when he had a Republican majority in the House and Senate for 6 years?

Similar Threads

  1. New medicine for Obamacare
    By ducknwork in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-02-2009, 10:55 AM
  2. Obamacare, Brave New World revisited
    By Bob Gutermuth in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 105
    Last Post: 09-17-2009, 11:05 AM
  3. Why Obamacare is failing
    By Bob Gutermuth in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-19-2009, 09:29 AM
  4. Docs declare war on obamacare
    By Bob Gutermuth in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-22-2009, 05:06 PM
  5. Cows, the Constitution and more...gdg
    By Franco in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-22-2008, 11:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •