I wonder: Does Romney want the Supreme Court to strike down Obamacare? I don't think he does

[LuckyTheDog]

The GOP base hates Romney, they just hate Obama more. And the main reason the GOP base hates Obama (besides the whole "he's black" thing) is Obamacare. They have been led to believe that the Affordable Care Act -- which many of them are already befitting from -- is the work of Satan. They think it'll end freedom in America and unleash death panels to come over and shoot grandma in the head. So, even though they hate Willard, they are motivated to vote.

But if the Supreme Court strikes down the ACA, then a lot of the urgency goes away. Mitt stops being the last line of defense against the evils of "socialized medicine" and starts looking a lot more like just another rich, out-of-tough turd burger with no moral center.

If Obamacare is struck down, I think a lot of the GOP base will stay home and watch Matlock reruns reruns on cable come election day.

[WingDinger]

1. NOOOOOO, the REAL reason they oppose it like the devil is:

It gives the population the idea that Government is there to solve human problems. Soon, we will expect action to alleviate human suffering on several fronts.

In fact, the definition of communism in S america was and maybe still is, the government thinks its mission is to improve the human condition.

[cherokeeprogressive]

2. So the fact that we have a "federal government" as opposed to a "national government" has nothing

to do with it?

You should maybe study the Constitution. It doesn't mean what you WANT it to mean... It's pretty specific in that our government is a "federal" one and NOT a "national" one.

If your next argument is car insurance, take a look into WHO forces you to buy it. It's your STATE, NOT the "federal government".

I don't WANT the population to have the idea that it's there to solve "human problems".

You might want to read the document again.

The definition of communism in S. America is as pertinent to this discussion as is the price of dirt clods in China.

[WingDinger]

3. I dont get how your distinction nullifies anything.

The Rethugs DONT think Gov is there to solve problems. Unless it's too many enemies still alive.

Dems think it is. What is your point?.

[cherokeeprogressive]

5. I'm not really sure where to start...

but I'll try. The Constitution wasn't written to "give the population ideas". It was pretty much written to state what the purpose of government IS. It states how Government will be organized. It states how Government will operate.

Then comes the Amendments. Let's take the first ten, shall we? You know; the ones we call the Bill of Rights? Did you know that the Bill of Rights, with the possible exeption of the Sixth Amendment, confers NO RIGHTS whatsoever on the Citizens of the United States? Read it... Read it carefully. It states AGAIN AND AGAIN what the Government CANNOT do to you and I. It LIMITS what the Government can and cannot do. NOWHERE in the Bill of Rights will you find anything requiring the government to DO.

I will reiterate that no document written ANYWHERE is pertinent to what the US Constitution allows for the US government to do.

That would be my point.

"Unless it's too many enemies still alive." I'm still trying to figure that statement out...

[WingDinger]

6. The general purpose of Government still is to address human need. You know, promoting the general we

welfare stuff.

Rethugs want Gov to address only protecting our borders. The reference to enemies.

My reference to giving the population ideas, is from the CONSTITUTIONALLY VETTED OBAMACARE. I didnt call for unconstitutional lollypops. There is much that is within the purview of Gov. Yet is called communism by Rethugs.

[cherokeeprogressive]

7. Constitutionally Vetted? Seriously?

Then why in the world would the Supreme Court take up the issue?

I'll say what I've said before... we have a FEDERAL government, and NOT a NATIONAL government. You'd do well to learn the difference.

I guess we'll see what's constitutionally vetted and what isn't within the next two weeks. And, I think you're going to be sorely disappointed.

[WingDinger]

8. By Dem lawyers. Thats how. And many things are passed by Gov, that havent been before the Supremes.

I dotn buy your distinction, and Romneys bull about it being fine when HE did it cuz it was the state, is silly. Youd do well to learn how silly that position is. Commerce clause and all that.

[woo me with science]

4. Of course he doesn't. None of the corporatists do.

They managed to mandate that...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002472947#post23


Wake the fuck up! WH: Individual mandate conceived of by the Heritage Foundation
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002512218