See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On October 14th, 2010 at 4:59 pm, Wade said:

   Fast tract to SCOTUS

2. #2
   On October 14th, 2010 at 5:05 pm, spaceycakes said:

   Saw this on Drudge. About bloody time.

3. #3
   On October 14th, 2010 at 5:09 pm, Flyoverman said:

   Nuke ‘em!!!

4. #4
   On October 14th, 2010 at 5:13 pm, stillontheroad said:

   Now look for other States that were holding back to go full bore and join the brave leaders – this should have been hands down for all 50 States.

5. #5
   On October 14th, 2010 at 5:14 pm, AmericaFirst said:

   We actually have judges that have read and understand the Constitution? I thought the ACLU infiltrated every position in the judicial system. Maybe Pelosi and Reid will try to impeach these judges to stop the suits.

6. #6
   On October 14th, 2010 at 5:14 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

   Still some hope that the Republic can survive.

   I think we are beyond the ‘firebell in the night’ stage…

7. #7
   On October 14th, 2010 at 5:27 pm, ThunderHawkk said:

   I want obama in prison. Impeached by Congress, convicted in court, and placed in Gitmo. He’d look good in an orange jumpsuit playing basketball or reading his Holy Quran.

   He’d have plenty of time to play with his waffle.

8. #8
   On October 14th, 2010 at 5:31 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

   Obama may be impeached, as it requires a simple House majority to vote out articles of impeachment, the equivalent of a Grand Jury indictment, but it takes a super-majority, two thirds, of the Senate to convict and remove from office.

   Absolute best case, 59 GOP Senators in January, more likely one or two either side of 50-50.

   As an aside, at 50-50, Biden breaks all ties, so the Senate would keep a Demonratic majority leader and all committee chairs would belong to the Demonrats. Which is why I think a 51-49 GOP Senate might have Olympia Snowe show her true colors and Jeffords to the Dems, to give them back the Senate.

9. #9
   On October 14th, 2010 at 5:33 pm, Mister P said:

   Again, I want the states to go after the violation of equal protection in the law. The exemptions to staff, the union and to “special” businesses and states violate the very premise of equality. It is an example of the Pigs being MORE EQUAL than the animals.

10. #10
    On October 14th, 2010 at 5:33 pm, Dexter Alarius said:

    “Those who fall under the individual mandate either comply with it, or they are penalized. It is not based on an activity that they make the choice to undertake.”

    That’s not true. People can choose to stop breathing and avoid the penalty.
    See, it is a choice!

11. #11
    On October 14th, 2010 at 5:35 pm, Bob69 said:

    Yeah, Right, la de da..

    This is what scares the hell out of me.. Look at our high court now and its anybody’s guess….”But, however the district courts rule on this case, their reception of the arguments made by the state attorneys general foretell that the ultimate decision will be made by the U.S. Supreme Court.” see, important stuff is usually at the end…

12. #12
    On October 14th, 2010 at 5:50 pm, zorro said:

    “Congress should not be permitted to secure and cast politically difficult votes on controversial legislation by deliberately calling something one thing, after which the defenders of that legislation take an “Alice-in-Wonderland” tack and argue in court that Congress really meant something else entirely, thereby circumventing the safeguard that exists to keep their broad power in check,” he wrote.

    Alice-in-Wonderland, love it.

13. #13
    On October 14th, 2010 at 5:58 pm, Blackstone said:

    Congress should not be permitted to secure and cast politically difficult votes on controversial legislation by deliberately calling something one thing, after which the defenders of that legislation take an “Alice-in-Wonderland” tack and argue in court that Congress really meant something else entirely, thereby circumventing the safeguard that exists to keep their broad power in check

    Why not? They did it with Social Security. It was sold to the American people as an “insurance” program, which citizens made “contributions” to, which would then go into a “trust fund” for them. Then the government turned right around and defended it in Court by saying that the “contributions” were nothing but income taxes, and the money just went into general revenue, and was appropriated at the pleasure of Congress.

14. #14
    On October 14th, 2010 at 6:00 pm, GladzKravtz said:

    With Kagan a SCOTUS justice now, who is the current US solicitor general? Web hunt turns up zilch so far.

15. #15
    On October 14th, 2010 at 6:13 pm, BOB said:

    On October 14th, 2010 at 5:13 pm, stillontheroad said:
    Now look for other States that were holding back to go full bore and join the brave leaders – this should have been hands down for all 50 States.

    I wish, but I don’t think Arkansas’ DemoRat governor Mike Beebe will ever join the lawsuit.

16. #16
    On October 14th, 2010 at 6:21 pm, Lindsay said:

    Fingers crossed for the USA and Constitution.

17. #17
    On October 14th, 2010 at 6:38 pm, letget said:

    At least it is on the record this needs to go to the SC. The sad fact, it might take years to get to the SC. This bho, team, and d’s have gotten WE American’s all bent out of shape on almost(every) thing they have done since elected. If this bho thinks we who vote for r’s will get to dc and ‘we gotta get along with the d’s and this bho’ you who we vote for better get another think! My Repbulic means more to me than ‘getting along’ with those who hate and want us a third world nation. My country has very precious time to un-do this mess. We vote for you, you want our money, you better by golly STOP this!
    L

18. #18
    On October 14th, 2010 at 6:49 pm, sbw999 said:

    This is very good, but Im perplexed as to what will be heard in a trial, and who will testify. Regardless of the intent of the drafters of the new law, it either is or is not constitutional. It seems that this issue should be decided as a matter of law, without testimonial facts, based upon legal precedent, and a consitutional analysis of the statute itself.

19. #19
    On October 14th, 2010 at 7:17 pm, Romeo13 said:

    People have no choice and there is no way to avoid it.

    This statement is untrue, IF you are part of certain religious sects, you get a pass on some requirments… which is why they also need to be arguing Equal Protection on this.

20. #20
    On October 14th, 2010 at 7:48 pm, 24Klady said:

    Romeo, but do they get exempted from paying into the kitty as a protected religious sect? Perhaps we need to all become card carrying members of Malkin’s Believers….

21. #21
    On October 14th, 2010 at 8:07 pm, ThackerAgency said:

    People don’t really understand the system.

    the mandate has to happen if you force insurance companies to cover everyone. . . otherwise everyone would wait until they got sick to buy coverage that was mandated.

    The problem where the states have the biggest beef is in the expansion of Medicaid. That is a burden on the states. It no longer allows the states to determine how much Medicaid welfare benefits they can afford based on their budget. The D’s tried to fund the expansion through the feds initially, but the states will have to bear the burden before 10 years is up.

    They need to fix Medicare. Rand Paul is right that they need to raise the deductible to at least 2000 dollars. People on the left and other places are outraged by that because they don’t understand that Medicare currently has a 1000 dollar deductible.

    You can purchase a supplement to pay for that deductible and most do. If you don’t get a supplement, you can get a Medicare Advantage plan that also pays that benefit for you and you don’t have to pay anything extra for that.

    This is why we can’t have an adult debate about the problems and solutions. A sensible solution such as an increase in deductible is shot down by people saying you want old people to die.

22. #22
    On October 14th, 2010 at 9:25 pm, rightisright said:

    A Reagan appointed judge comes through, finally. How is it the libs didn’t find a liberal judge to decide this matter as they do in most other cases?

23. #23
    On October 14th, 2010 at 9:37 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

    Hey judges, just follow the Constitution, you know that thing you swore an oath to, and everything will turn out okay!

24. #24
    On October 14th, 2010 at 9:50 pm, rightisright said:

    We actually have judges that have read and understand the Constitution?

    Very few and that includes the present day SCOTUS.

25. #25
    On October 14th, 2010 at 10:11 pm, Blackstone said:

    On October 14th, 2010 at 9:25 pm, rightisright said:

    How is it the libs didn’t find a liberal judge to decide this matter as they do in most other cases?

    Because they weren’t the ones bringing the suit.

26. #26
    On October 14th, 2010 at 10:19 pm, bjc said:

    *This is a hopeful first step; Need about 12 or 14 more states to man up and join in the lawsuit; Tennessee should have been one of them from the get go, but we have Bland Bredesen, who, by the way, just came out with a book proposing single payer health care funded through a payroll tax; Tax would be approx. 46% of paycheck if you do the math; Yeah, that’ll work; Moron!

27. #27
    On October 14th, 2010 at 10:45 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

    On October 14th, 2010 at 8:07 pm, ThackerAgency said:
    People don’t really understand the system.

    I do. As more and more states challenge this POS, more and more Democraps will swear that they would not have voted for it if they had were allowed to read the farkin bill.

    Do I get a cyber cookie?

28. #28
    On October 14th, 2010 at 11:22 pm, ThackerAgency said:

    soap,

    the lawsuit is about the mandate. If they get rid of the mandate, no insurance company will issue policies to anyone.

    I know this will shock people to hear me say this especially. . . but it is possible to have a “medicare for all” type of system. This is only because they are insisting on using the insurance model for reform of the health care delivery system.

    If they must use the insurance model, then a basic Medicare-like safety net could be established with high deductibles. Everyone would qualify and private insurance companies could issue supplemental plans for people who wanted more coverage. This is actually how the Canadian system works. Everyone has coverage but there are supplements available from private companies to pay what the government system doesn’t. (this over-simplifies the differences b/t Canadian system. . . they have a small and homogeneous society. It works because they are 1/10 of our population with fewer impoverished minorities who won’t take care of their health.)

    But understand, the Medicare-for-all plan will not be affordable from the government if the benefits are like union benefits. It needs to be basic high deductible coverage for it to be affordable.

    People using the system have to have some skin in the game. The best way to lower the cost of health care is to eat healthy and exercise (so you don’t have to go to the doctor). But people won’t do that.

    I still prefer reform be done by flooding the system with primary care doctors trained in the military. Expand the VA system and improve it with military spending. Open walk in clinics across the country to expand access and offer the services to everyone for a fee. Turn people away from emergency rooms that aren’t emergencies and send them to the clinics.

    There are solutions. . . lots of solutions. Nothing that came out of DC solves anything. It just spends a crapload of money. . . our money.

29. #29
    On October 15th, 2010 at 12:14 am, rlongenbach said:

    Whatever. All it says it that it can go to trial.

    And during the trial the DOJ will bring up the “laws have previously MANDATED the ownership of guns, and that was not found to be unconstitutional, yet it’s not in the Constitution, so therefore Congress has the right to mandate the purchase of health insurance”

    and the case will go in favor of the DOJ.

    Besides, IF the mandate is found to be unconstitutional, the rest of the law won’t be….and then you’ll be only a few years to full government run single payer health care. Because the private insurance companies can’t afford to stay in business and follow the following rules:

    Not allow to deny coverage or extreme pricing based on preexisting conditions
    Coverage begins at 12:01am the day it is purchased, so it can be retroactive
    Mandating that admin costs can not exceed a certain amount

    Basically the first two items there are the death knell for private insurance. If coverage isn’t mandated, and it must kick in immediately retroactive to the same day, it would be the same as being allowed to buy auto insurance AFTER you have an accident. It is probably cheaper for the healthiest Americans to not have coverage until they actually need it, and self-pay the other minor things that come up in the year. Insurance where you don’t pay when you’re not using it is not insurance……

    The only way to completely stop this whole thing is a full repeal, which the courts are loath to do unless it involves a law that “violates” someone’s {imaginary} civil rights, like illegal aliens rights to work, education, health care, or the rights of calling a marriage between two consenting adults, etc.

    But I doubt this law can be repealed. NO candidate will be able to run and win when their opponent can mention “They wanted to see children die, and it’s going to happen now that they repealed the Health Care Affordability Act! Kids won’t be able to get health insurance and then they’ll die!!!!!” Even though it’s not really true (usually if you have a child with severe special needs, and you don’t have insurance through your employer, why haven’t you signed up for SCHIP or a state health plan yet? Is it because you’re being paid an exceptional salary either under the table or as an independent contractor, so you don’t make it a priority????)

30. #30
    On October 15th, 2010 at 1:13 am, On-my-soap-box said:

    On October 14th, 2010 at 11:22 pm, ThackerAgency said:

    Oh, that system. No cookie then? Dern, I thought I was onto something…

    Seems we would not NEED the courts if there was no bill in the first place. As this POS gets more exposure, the Donks will do everythig to distance themselves for the stench. If history proves true, the Repubs will not hammer the Donks for allowing this Pig to exist.

31. #31
    On October 15th, 2010 at 4:23 am, tbear44 said:

    I am one of the lucky ones who has never needed any medical care–ever (in my adult life). Now at the age of 55 I know my luck will run out one of these days. Of course, I can’t eat peanuts or raw carrots because I don’t have enough back teeth left, but oh well. I live paycheck to paycheck and I have always felt that if I ever get a life threatening desease or illness I would just retreat to my wilderness in Alaska and let nature take it’s course. As of now I am still as healthy as always, so why do I have to pay for Obamacare? This IS a free country isn’t it?

32. #32
    On October 15th, 2010 at 6:49 am, tbear44 said:

    Ooops on the spelling of disease

33. #33
    On October 15th, 2010 at 8:37 am, conservativesRus said:

    On October 14th, 2010 at 5:13 pm, stillontheroad said:
    … – this should have been hands down for all 50 States.

    It might be if we lived in a rational world – however, here in CT, our current Attorney General completely agrees with government running every facet of our life. Further, now he seeks to join the US Senate so he can have every American bow down to the gov’t.
    As far as he’s concerned, it’s not “We the people” but rather “we the government”.
    What is pathetic is the number of people who are so lacking that they desire to have the government run their lives.

34. #34
    On October 15th, 2010 at 8:54 am, conservativesRus said:

    On October 14th, 2010 at 11:22 pm, ThackerAgency said:
    I know this will shock people to hear me say this especially. . . but it is possible to have a “medicare for all” type of system.

    Where in the Constitution do you find medicare or 99.9% of the rest of what the federals do?

35. #35
    On October 15th, 2010 at 8:55 am, stillontheroad said:

    conservativesRus said:
    The terible irony is, they are also the first to wimper about we did not know this would happen or the classic – hey, this is wrong.

36. #36
    On October 15th, 2010 at 9:20 am, Danceswithdachshunds said:

    The bloom just keeps falling further off the rose don’t it?

37. #37
    On October 15th, 2010 at 9:23 am, ThackerAgency said:

    Where in the Constitution do you find medicare or 99.9% of the rest of what the federals do?

    I’m not talking about the constitution. I’m talking about math.

    Like the 2000 dollar deductible. While politicians will say you want old people to die, it’s really just math. Increase the deductible to have people who use services pay more and it will make the system more solvent.

    I also said I didn’t think that insurance was the appropriate means of reform for the health delivery system.

    Please note I said it was POSSIBLE. The current Obamacare is not even POSSIBLE mathematically. Nothing to do with the Constitution, everything to do with math.

    I would prefer they use their power of military spending to expand the VA and make it the best care in the world. That actually is Constitutionally sound and it would be more of a fix than anything they are considering now because they don’t know what they are talking about in DC.

38. #38
    On October 15th, 2010 at 9:27 am, Danceswithdachshunds said:

    ThackerAgency said: …. they don’t know what they are talking about in DC.

    A disease for which there exists a simple cure called electoral surgery.

39. #39
    On October 15th, 2010 at 11:01 am, Romeo13 said:

    On October 15th, 2010 at 9:23 am, ThackerAgency said:

    The math not working? Its not a bug, its a feature.

    The whole plan is built to fail, so the Government will be forced to step in and take control… just like with GM.

    The “fines” are much lower than the cost of Health insurance… so as long as a company has to take pre-existing conditions, you can still wait until you are sick to get insurance.

    People WILL figure that out… and then the system will collapse because no one will be paying into the insurance pool, until they get sick.

    Then the Gov takes over because of the “crises”…

40. #40
    On October 15th, 2010 at 1:22 pm, T-Bone said:

    The other side of this they won was the mandate on the states. Florida and So. Carolina have said they would have a $1 billion cost of increased medicaid costs under Obama care. As the Feds kick people off, the states will have to add them. The Federal government is not allowed to impose costs on states like that without their input.

    I believe they won two of the six issues that were presented. The individual mandate and the transfer of medicare costs to the states.

    Also interesting was the severability of the bill. According to what I heard, the government won’t be able to just change those particular provisions and keep Donkeycrap going. The whole bill will have to be scrapped. This is especially true with regard to the individual mandate because that is the centerpiece of how they will pay fo rthe entire bill. If that goes, the entire bills goes. Instant repeal.

    I find it funny after all the Federal judges that have thrown out state iniiatives like prop 187 in CA or prop 8 on gay marriage. A million voters vote them in and one Federal judge throws it out. Especially egregious was the gay judge that threw out the gay marriage prohibition. No conflict of interest there? Now the shoe is on the other foot. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Sweet revenge!

41. #41
    On October 15th, 2010 at 1:25 pm, NJ-Aviator said:

    But “in this case we are dealing with something very different. The individual mandate applies across the board. People have no choice and there is no way to avoid it. Those who fall under the individual mandate either comply with it, or they are penalized. It is not based on an activity that they make the choice to undertake.”

    Remember the phrase kids would say when they objected to being told they had to do, or not do something?

    “It’s a free country!”

    Much to the chagrin of those kids, and to the delight of Obama, that whole “free” thing is starting to be less and less true.

    Here’s hoping this case buries ObamaCare.

42. #42
    On October 15th, 2010 at 2:12 pm, ThackerAgency said:

    Agreed all around.

    Since you mentioned GM, you would have to be an idiot to buy GM stock. You are going to be the first to lose your money when GM goes bankrupt again.

    They aren’t able to dominate like they did before Lexus, Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Kia and others made good competitive cars. GM is PRAYING that they get people to buy their IPO so that they can have cash. The Volt will go down in infamy as one of the worst vehicles Detroit has ever made.

    They see that Ford did it successfully, but Ford and GM are NOT the same story. Ford has redone their entire lineup and streamlined and worked their way out of debt.

    I recommend Ford stock, but I would rather flush my money down the toilet and be entertained than buy GM stock. . . and I’m a GM guy. I love my Hummer H2. . . top of the line American T-R-U-C-K. I intend to have it forever and maintain it with profits from other stocks.

43. #43
    On October 15th, 2010 at 5:48 pm, Blackstone said:

    On October 15th, 2010 at 11:01 am, Romeo13 said:

    The “fines” are much lower than the cost of Health insurance… so as long as a company has to take pre-existing conditions, you can still wait until you are sick to get insurance.

    People WILL figure that out… and then the system will collapse because no one will be paying into the insurance pool, until they get sick.

    Then the Gov takes over because of the “crises”…

    And the more disturbing thing is that even many conservatives like Tom Coburn have drunk the “pre-existing condition” Kool-Aid.

44. #44
    On October 15th, 2010 at 5:52 pm, Blackstone said:

    On October 15th, 2010 at 1:22 pm, T-Bone said:

    According to what I heard, the government won’t be able to just change those particular provisions and keep Donkeycrap going. The whole bill will have to be scrapped. This is especially true with regard to the individual mandate because that is the centerpiece of how they will pay fo rthe entire bill. If that goes, the entire bills goes. Instant repeal.

    Great news, if true.

    I find it funny after all the Federal judges that have thrown out state iniiatives like prop 187 in CA or prop 8 on gay marriage. A million voters vote them in and one Federal judge throws it out. Especially egregious was the gay judge that threw out the gay marriage prohibition. No conflict of interest there? Now the shoe is on the other foot. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Sweet revenge!

    Except it’s not even the same “sword”. The striking down of Props 8 and 187 was pure judicial activism – inventing and twisting new meanings out of the Constitution. Striking down Obamacare would be the most faithful application of the actual wording of the Constitution. It’s the people who are trying to have it upheld who are in the position of teasing new meanings out of the plain language.