90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
Week In The News: Health Care, Immigration, Wildfires

The Supreme Court on health care. And immigration. “Show me your papers.” Wildfire and mass evacuation in Colorado. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

President Barack Obama speaks in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012, after the Supreme Court ruled on his health care legislation. (AP)

President Barack Obama speaks in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012, after the Supreme Court ruled on his health care legislation. (AP)

The Supreme Court doesn’t do high drama that often. But when it does, watch out. Explosive news from the court this week. A 5-4 vote, after months of anticipation, to uphold President Obama’s health care reforms. The conservative chief justice siding with the liberal majority. Relief in the reform camp. Fury in the GOP.

We’ve got a “show me your papers” green light from the same court. A contempt vote on Eric Holder in the House. Epic wildfire in Colorado. Tens of thousands evacuated. Mountains burning.

This hour, On Point: our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Jan Crawford, political correspondent and chief legal correspondent for CBS News.

Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of The Nation.

Jack Beatty, On Point news analyst.

From Tom’s Reading List

The New York Times “The Supreme Court on Thursday left standing the basic provisions of the health care overhaul, ruling that the government may use its taxation powers to push people to buy health insurance.”

The Weekly Standard “With the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Obamacare, the issue now shifts to the elected branches of government and raises this question: Will the intense opposition dissipate or will it lead to a fervent new effort to repeal the liberal health care law?”

Washington Post “President Barack Obama cast the Supreme Court’s election-year vindication of his sweeping federal health care law as a victory for the American people. His Republican rival Mitt Romney vowed to repeal it on his first day in office if he wins the November election.”

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • JGC

    “Show me your papers.”  OK, but what exactly are the acceptable papers?  Is it just a driver’s license?  If you don’t drive, what are other acceptable forms of ID papers? What exactly are the legally mandated forms of ID that can be used if you are pulled over by the police and expected to establish your legal residency in the U.S.? Very few drive around with their passport in the glovebox. If they have a passport.

    A certain number of local residents will be pulled over and expected to justify their residency for the first time in their lives.  Get ready for that blowback.

    • Azra

      Bet they’re purposely vague about it, so unscrupulous police will be able to ask for whatever form of ID tickles their fancy at any given moment.

    • feettothefire

       I’m an American citizen, If an officer asked me for proof of citizenship, I’d tell him to bite me. Of course, he’d then feel compelled to “bring me in.” If enough people do this over time, it will become evident to everyone that a lot of U.S. citizens are being badgered by law enforcement for……what is it again, looking like an alien? Where did they come up with insane idea anyway? Did someone read “The History of The Gestapo” and have a brainstorm?

      • Don_B1

        In its search for votes, the Republican Party has decided to appeal to xenophobics to win in the short term and deal with the ramifications in the future (they hope). And there has always been a large group of Americans who can be influenced by that type of appeal.

    • JGC

      This law also strikes me as being a cousin to Bloomberg’s Stop ‘N Frisk program in NYC.  The best remedy to this is to have a more diverse police force that accurately reflects the local population and that has a better chance of understanding the currents in which they operate.

      • Don_B1

        Unfortunately diversity has been shown to not be a panacea: the cops executing Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly’s “Stop ‘N Frisk” policy are a diverse group but suffer from “group think” so that no matter what ethnicity, they select out blacks primarily for stops or because of the nature of how groups assemble in public spaces (whites often being somewhat wealthier –?– can assemble elsewhere than on the street?) equally often to those of other ethnicities.

  • Sean

    Darrell Issa is Little McCarthy, and I’ll relish seeing him totally ignored and rendered impotent as the Justice Department “files” his blowhard tantrum in a trashcan somewhere.

    Keep doing a great job for America, Mr. Holder!

    • William

      It was a bipartisan vote in Congress so there was nothing political about this issue. AG Holder lied to the Congress and got caught.

      • JustSayin

         …and sadly that will be the end of the whole affair of government employees selling guns to drug cartels for profit. The magic of misdirection.

      • Hidan

         http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/which-democrats-voted-to-hold-eric-holder-in-contempt-of-congress/2012/06/28/gJQAUKVy9V_blog.html

        Good old NRA,

        More than 100 Democrats left the House floor before the vote, but 17
        moderate Democrats stayed behind and joined with Republicans in voting
        for contempt, robbing the Obama administration and congressional
        Democrats of its main argument that the vote was a blatant partisan
        maneuver to discredit Holder and the White House in an election year.

        All but one of the 17 Democrats has previously been endorsed by the National Rifle Association, which said it would be tracking Thursday’s vote in determining future endorsements. In a letter to lawmakers last week,

        • Willaim

          So the radical liberals walked out and the moderates stood their ground and did the right thing. AG Holder has tapped danced around this issue for over a year and was given sufficent time to comply with the demands of Congress. AG Holder is not stranger to tap dancing as we saw with this handling of the Clinton pardon of Marc Rich.

        • Nancy

          That’s right, utterly political and forced by the NRA.

          No one would have, in good conscience, voted Mr. Holder in contempt, but the NRA has more than enough guns to hold to peoples heads.

          Everyone knows it’s the NRA’s fault that BOTH the US and Mexico are screwed by guns galore, so this is another attempt by the NRA to misdirect blame for just how bad their blackmail policies are screwing everyone in North America.

      • MrNutso

        Bipartisan in the sense that NRA is an equal opportunity de-elector.  Vote for this or loose NRA funding and expect and NRA backed challenger in the next election.

      • jefe68

        What is up with you?
        Are you that delusional or is that you just don’t read with enough comprehension to get the facts straight.

        • Don_B1

          It is not his purpose to get the facts straight, at least in his posts here. He just needs to “know” enough to spread the right-wing lies that have been focus-group tested to appeal to the inattentive voter.

      • TFRX

        Fortune magazine has a real article on this which you obviously haven’t read.

        Yes, “Fortune”, the last bastion of the Time Life empire, and full of hippies.

        • Don_B1

          I would not count on William not having read the Fortune piece. He probably has already begun trying to figure out how to get people to dismiss it, or is just waiting to hear from Grover on how to do it.

      • Newton Whale

        There are really only two types of politicians in America: those who can be intimidated by the NRA and those who can’t.

        All of the former voted for contempt.
        None of the latter did.

  • Azra

    

    HEALTH CARE REFORM IS A “BFN”!

    Hooray for us! Thank you, President Obama, and Supreme Court. My faith in America has been restored, and I, along with many millions of (former) unfortunates, will soon have health insurance! We are surprised, elated and grateful beyond words.

    • Azra

      No it isn’t. It’s a BFD.

    • Don_B1

      Decent healthcare for all has definitely passed a big hurdle, but faces another this November; the election of Willard Mitt Romney will be the end of it for another decade unless the American people, after seeing what the Republican Party creates, is reviled enough to through them all out. But underestimating the ability of the American people to see through Republican well-financed machinations is not easy to do.

      • Azra

        Too true.

  • Azra

    Things are not looking good for Mr. and Mrs. Zimmerman, who are both still in “The Graybar Hotel”. More evidence against George, in the form of a Latino co-worker, who had allegedly been bullied by George for two or three months, until George was finally fired. If those alleged “racially-charged emails”, (which came to light after his arrest), are genuine, and combined with what we already know, he’s in a heap of trouble. Then there’s all that evidence against him, which isn’t being disclosed until after the trial.

    Now, as he sits in his cell, he must be wishing that he had stayed in his car, as he was told to do.

  • Azra

    Now that there is tangible evidence, (as if it were needed to convince anyone), that the unscrupulous Republicans are hurrying, (it’s supposed to be illegal to pull these tricks so close to an election), to do whatever it takes, to prevent certain people from voting, I wonder if anything will be done about it? Any guesses?

    • William

      Leaving ineligible voters on the list is not a solution. Noncitizens should not be voting,” U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle, appointed by President Clinton in 1996, said. “People need to know we are running an honest election.”

      • Terry Tree Tree

        WHAT percentage of ‘purged voters’, were Republican? 
           WHAT percentage were VALID?
           IF they didn’t purge MORE Republicans that were Valid Voters, than Democrat Valid Voters, it is EASILY a political crime!

      • jefe68

        What a load of bunk. The GOP is doing this for one reason only, to fix elections. The amount of voter fraud in the country is very low. This all about control and nothing to do with voter fraud.
        .

        Ahead of the 2012 elections, a wave of legislation tightening restrictions on voting has suddenly swept across the country. More than 5 million Americans could be affected by the new rules already put in place this year — a number larger than the margin of victory in two of
        the last three presidential elections.

        http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voting_law_changes_in_2012

        Voter fraud my ass.

      • TFRX

        The half-assed hell-bent for leather slipshod way they’re doing this, and the CYA statements about it, are telling. I’d love to see them throw middle-aged white folks out and listen to the shitstorm.

        Is it that the GOP has been out of the practice of performing the role of governance for sooooo long that when they try to do it properly, they don’t know how?

      • Azra

        The things that concern you are extremely rare, and are the very least of our problems, especially now that Republicans have admitted their motives, the ones we’ve known about all along. Do you thing the new sham laws will be repealed before November? Do you think the criminals will ever be brought to justice, or even go to trial? If you want anything resembling an honest election, better start some petitions right away; you can begin with one to have the unconstitutional laws repealed, one to prosecute every criminal involved, and one to get rid of the rigged voting machines, and go to ballots which are marked in indelible ink, with a carbon copy, or two. One copy would be given to the voter right after voting, and maybe another could be put in a box, and sent to Washington, to be recounted. After every American vote is finally tallied, they can tell if any were “lost”.

    • MrNutso

      The motives of these laws were laid out bare (at least in PA) by Rep. Mike Turzai:

      ” Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”

      http://www.politicspa.com/turzai-voter-id-law-means-romney-can-win-pa/37153/ 

      • Azra

        What could be plainer, more unpatriotic, or more incriminating?

  • Azra

    Romney has a snowball’s chance in hell of even being elected, and getting approval to repeal our health car law would be even more impossible.

    • Azra

      (MORE impossible??? Sorry ’bout that.)

    • Don_B1

      If they gain control of the Senate, the Republicans could use filibuster-proof “reconciliation” to defund the PPACA, thus decapitating it in practice if not removing it from the books.

      • Azra

        Then we’ll have to make sure that only Democrats are elected, if we want anything that’s GOOD and necessary for the Country.

  • LinP

    To the Republicans on the SCOTUS decision:

    You’ll always have Citizens United.

    • Margbi

       Loved your bon mot but I do have a question about all the money raised by groups supposedly not in contact with the candidates. What does this say about us, the voters? Are we so shallow that we are swayed by the huge amounts of money spent to convince us of something?  Please, people, investigate, get the facts, before you believe something just because you’ve seen an ad advocating a position, any position. In other words, THINK.

      • feettothefire

         THINK!! THINK!!! Are you mad, woman?

        • LinP

           Read sarcasm comment above.

      • LinP

         It’s sarcasm. Honestly….

      • Azra

        After so much brainwashing, facts only confuse them.

      • Don_B1

        Unfortunately, there are enough people who do not have or are not interested enough to take the time to learn the real facts. That is why the huge amounts of money used to repeat lies over and over without being debunked each time works. When people hear something without it being refuted, they begin to believe that it must be true.

        The height of the MSM stenography problem should be apparent when the ombudsman of The New York Times could ask whether the newspaper should indicate that the argument of one side was false! In other words, he was asking if the paper should allow itself to publish lies as possible truth. If that can happen at The New York Times, what happens at “lesser” papers? And those that do search out the truth, such as the McClatchy papers (30 dailies), do not get a lot of visibility, although the Sacramento Bee occasionally does.

  • Ed

    Well, since it’s a tax it only takes 51 votes to repeal. And some states might decide they can’t afford the medicaid increase and opt out, which they can do without penalty. It certainly raises the stakes on the coming election.

    We badly need health care reform but this is very problematic.

    • mary elizabeth

      Federal funds are available to cover the medicaid expansion.  Still, states may chose to opt out.  Interseting to see why they would  do this.

      • MrNutso

        They will stand on principle whether it’s a good idea or not.  Listen to statements by Rep.  Governors already.

    • Terry Tree Tree

      Catholic clergy could have been providing a LOT of health care, with the money they spent on hiding and protecting the CRIMINAL clergy?

    • J__o__h__n

      51 votes is no longer the majority. 

      • jefe68

        In this case it is. If Romney wins the election and the GOP gains seats in both houses say good-by to the ACA law. It will be over turned if the results are in the GOP’s favor. If the Democrats and President Obama do not get their message out and do not fight the regressive extremist that have taken over the GOP all of this will been for nothing.

      • Don_B1

        To make Jefe68′s comment a bit more explicit: If they gain control of the Senate, the Republicans could use filibuster-proof “reconciliation” to defund the PPACA, thus decapitating it in practice if not removing it from the books.

        Even if Obama is reelected, he could eventually have to sign something with lowered funding unless he can work a government shutdown to his favor as Clinton did.

      • Gregg

        Sure it is. Reconciliation was good enough for Obamacare, it’s good enough to repeal it. And now that it’s a tax it falls under a legitimate usage.

  • Newton Whale

    MY FRIEND WORKS FOR THE NATIONAL HEALTH, DR. ROBERT

    Ring my friend, I said you’d call Doctor RobertDay or night he’ll be there any time at all, Doctor RobertDoctor Robert, you’re a new and better manHe helps you to understandHe does everything he can, Doctor RobertIf you’re down he’ll pick you up, Doctor RobertTake a drink from his special cup, Doctor RobertDoctor Robert, he’s a man you must believeHelping everyone in needNo one can succeed like Doctor RobertWell, well, well, you’re feeling fineWell, well, well, he’ll make you… Doctor RobertMy friend works for the national health, Doctor RobertDon’t pay money just to see yourself with Doctor RobertDoctor Robert, you’re a new and better manHe helps you to understandHe does everything he can, Doctor RobertWell, well, well, you’re feeling fineWell, well, well, he’ll make you… Doctor RobertRing my friend, I said you’d call Doctor RobertRing my friend, I said you’d call Doctor RobertDoctor Roberthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCpGy3pwkKM

  • Newton Whale

    MY FRIEND WORKS FOR THE NATIONAL HEALTH, DR. ROBERT
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCpGy3pwkKM 

    (You really need to bring back the edit function for these comments)

  • Newton Whale

    It’s bad enough that CNN and FOX blew the biggest Supreme Court decision in decades because they either couldn’t wait or couldn’t read.

    All day yesterday I heard one commentator after another say that Justice Roberts had come up with a way to save ACA that the Obama administration never argued. It’s not true.

    Is it too much to ask these highly paid bloviators to read the actual transcripts of the arguments before the court? Is that too much work? Too beneath them? Maybe they’re afraid that actual facts would get in the way of all that bloviating:

    March 27, 2012, from the oral argument by Solicitor General  DONALD B. VERRILLI, JR:

    GENERAL VERRILLI: On the — December 23rd, a point of constitutional order was called to, in fact, with respect to this law. The floor sponsor, Senator Baucus, defended it as an exercise of the taxing power. In his response to the point of order, the Senate voted 60 to39 on that proposition.The legislative history is replete with members of Congress explaining that this law is constitutional as an exercise of the taxing power. It was attacked as a tax by its opponents. So I don’t think this is a situation where you can say that Congress was avoiding any mention of the tax power.It would be one thing if Congress explicitly disavowed an exercise of the tax power. But given that it hasn’t done so, it seems to me that it’s — not only is it fair to read this as an exercise of the tax power, but this Court has got an obligation to construe it as an exercise of the tax power, if it can be upheld on that basis.http://www.npr.org/2012/03/27/149465820/transcript-supreme-court-the-health-care-law-and-the-individual-mandate That's right.President Obama’s lawyer, the guy who was mocked and pilloried, whose argument was called “A train wreck” by Jeffrey Toobin, made the actual winning argument that Justice Roberts based his opinion on.You would never know it from the talking heads, who will spend the next 5 months telling you lies that fit their narrative.

    • William

      But no court below the Supreme Court found it was a tax so why did Roberts bring it up?

      • Newton Whale

        Because it was fully briefed and argued by the Government as an alternative basis for upholding the law. That was the government’s argument I quoted from.

        The court MUST consider all arguments raised by the parties, as Verrilli said:

        “this Court has got an obligation to construe it as an exercise of the tax power, if it can be upheld on that basis.” 

        • william

          It seems odd to not just reject the case and tell the government to come back using the tax excuse for Obama care.

          • jimino

             You are obviously clueless about how these appellate decisions are made, so why not just stop digging?

          • Newton Whale

            Clearly you have no knowledge of how the American judicial system works. What is odd is that you somehow believe that makes you qualified to comment on it.

        • nj_v2

          After lots of blathering and baseless happy talk, beginning at 4:07:

          “For us to say that you’ve gotta take a responsibility to get insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.…You can’t just make up that language and decide that’s called a tax increase.…I absolutely reject that notion [that it's a tax increase].”

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAmtNCtdWeo&feature=player_embedded

          Nice that Stephanopoulos didn’t let go on this.

          Obama says what he says, then his proxies say what they say in court. Sure looks like blatant misrepresentation on Oily Bomber’s part. How do the Obamabots rationalize this one?

          • Newton Whale

            Mitt Romney said exactly the same thing about exactly the same charge.:
            Romney: “It’s not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment”

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HymUU7OADbU&feature=youtu.be 

            If it works as intended, no one will pay the tax.

            In both cases the intent is not to raise revenue but to act as an incentive to obtain health insurance.

      • John in Amherst

         It was a secondary argument presented during the hearing of the case, as was stated in the original post to which you responded. 
        The thought that conservatives are not guaranteed victories in the conservative supreme court seems to be so incomprehensible to them it leaves the right totally addled.  

  • Anonymous

    If I were Obama, I would make a big speech about ObamaCare. I would say, they call it ObamaCare and I agree because Obama Cares. Obama Cares about ordinary people, the additional millions of people who will benefit from this. There is no RomneyCare people can speak of Ronmey doesn’t care, he might have cared when he was in Massachusetts, but not anymore.

    • Azrastarr

      It could be argued that Mitt just wanted Romneycare for the Economy, since fewer people taking sick days/dying means more people are working. We’ll never know.

      Seamus believes that Mitt never had a heart. So do the kids he bullied, especially the one whose traumatic haircut we found out about.

      WOOF!

      Seamus

  • Terry Tree Tree

    Will Republicans really KILL all the people that will die, without the Affordable Health Care, that Republicans designed, decades ago?

  • Terry Tree Tree

    Banksters FIXED interest on $ 554 TRILLION DOLLARS?  How many $BILLIONS did they SCAM, by doing that?  How many governments could have stayed solvent, with the money Banksters STOLE?

  • Terry Tree Tree

    An Unemployed man saved a toddler from the subway, but Banksters, that scam the public, are WORTH more?  How many children has Jamie Diamon saved?

  • JGC

    On to the economy,now, Congress and Mr. President.  Just remember it is now Jobs, Jobs, Jobs from here on out. The government needs to focus on pathways to job creation.

    • Terry Tree Tree

      Republican ‘Job Creators’ will create jobs, when they have gotten MONEY, for creating jobs, for 20 years?

    • Greyman

      Arguably, since January 2009, “it’s been the economy, genius!” (an adaptation of Clinton’s sage advice from 1992). Obama’s pursuit of history took his eyes and attention off of the broader economy for most of the two years he spent working on getting PPACA through Congress. Had Obama not proved so divisive a figure with introduction of the unilateralist Democratic agenda, he could actually have worked with Republicans to craft policies to help with economic recovery. The choice was Obama’s, taken even against the advice of his advisors. The economy in its present doldrums is not Bush’s economy now, it is fully and squarely Obama’s.

      • TFRX

        “Eyes off the economy”?

        “Divisive”? “Unilaterist Democratic agenda”?

        What parallel universe have you been in for 3 1/2 years?

        Your disingenuity is showing.

  • Terry Tree Tree

    ‘Job Creators’ in Congress, are causing 123,000 Lockheed employees to get Lay-Off Notices?
       Builders say it will affect over a MILLION jobs, because Congress CANNOT do THEIR jobs? 

  • Terry Tree Tree

    Rick Scott, former hospital CEO, spent $79 MILLION DOLLARS, of his OWN money, to get a job that pays $150,000? 
       SEE, the jobs are there, you just have to have $MILLIONS, to buy one?

    • JGC

      I was just thinking about Gov. Scott at this moment.  He said he is disappointed in the Supreme Court ruling and stands with Justice Kennedy in saying the whole law should have been struck.

      But his former company, HCA, had a positive response to the news of the ruling.  Even at the expense of their credentials as businesspeople, folks like Gov. Scott and Gov. Romney side with the far right.

      • Terry Tree Tree

        HCA has taken LOTS of MONEY, from the government, AND the public!

    • Terry Tree Tree

      CORRECTION;  I mis-heard.  It was ONLY $ 70 MILLION DOLLARS, that Rick Scott paid, of his OWN money, to get a job that pays $150,000?
         WHAT does a hospital CEO do, to EARN (?) SO MUCH, that he can spend $ 70 MILLION, to get a job?
         HOW MUCH did he get paid?  Benefits? 
         One would think that a hospital CEO would need to care about patients, and therefore the health care of the general public?  WHY has he FOUGHT health care for the public?

      • Steve_T

         His pay would decrease.

  • Terry Tree Tree

    A Spray-on BATTERY, with Spray-On Solar Collector?  SOOO Many GOOD possibilities there!!

  • Terry Tree Tree

    Bishop Sheen is on track to be ‘Sainted’, for Child-Molesting and/or Child-Abuse, since that is evidently what Catholics REVERE MOST?

  • Conner44

    Not sure where Crawford is coming from, but the rest of this panel is a bunch of libby whiners, and I’m including the host.

    • Ray in VT

      Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning or something?

      • Azra

        Republicans are pouting because they didn’t get their way, for a change.

    • feettothefire

       Please, stop whining.

    • jefe68

      Here’s an idea, try not listening.
      If you don’t like the show, don’t listen.
      Rush Limbaugh has a right wing whine fest today and everyday for that matter, why not brush up on some extremist rhetoric.

      You can count how many times he calls President Obama a  dictator. Maybe start a new drinking game.

      • Ray in VT

        A lot of Rush’s fans probably can’t.  They run out of fingers and toes pretty quickly.

      • J__o__h__n

        Does Rush have a website where we can post stupid comments?

        • Ray in VT

          Yes.  I think that it’s called Fox News.  More seriously, though, a briefly browsed El Rushbo’s site, and I didn’t see a place where people could post comments.  Maybe there’s some members only place where one can, but I think that it’s interesting, considering many here will say that liberals hate having their opinions and positions challenged, that perhaps the biggest conservative voice in America does not allow such a discussion on his site.

    • Iamnotageneral

      True dat.

  • JGC

    Overlooked in the news crush of Supreme Court rulings on immigration and health care, was the news that JPMorgan’s losses could actually be upwards of $9 billion.  Jamie Dimon dismissed $2billion as chump change that could be swallowed by JPMorgan.  Does a figure of $9 billion essentially wipe out all their profits for the past year?

    Time to bring back Glass-Steagall and to bring in the Volcker rule before these nuts finish off our economy for once and for all.

    • Terry Tree Tree

      Isn’t that ‘chump-change’ coming out of Jamie Diamon’s pocket, like it should?  If one of his low-level employees ‘lost’, or ‘misplaced’ a few thousand dollars, especially Jamie Diamon’s personal money, he’d FIRE them, and DEMAND re-payment?

      • Don_B1

        The “trader” that went “rogue” and created the losing positions (and in the process became 90% or so owner of the derivatives for that position) was still employed by J.P. Morgan Chase the last time I knew, but his female boss’s resignation was accepted in less than a week.

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    The extent of the wildfires in Colorado are in part due to budget cuts to the forest service and other agencies responsible for managing these areas. Two years ago I saw the extensive devastation of the pine beetle in Colorado Rockies and was concerned about the billions of dead trees just waiting to be lit up by a lightening strike and start firestorms. I was wondering why these trees weren’t being taken down before it was too late: I guess it was budget cuts. Republican politicians have called this situation mismanagement which is typical for them: they rant about the incompetence of government and every time they they take control, they prove themselves right -this problem has been growing for over a decade.

    • Terry Tree Tree

      RAMPANT BUDGET-CUTTING, is SAVING money, according to Republicans?   EXCEPT cutting their OWN pay?  THEIR pet projects? 
         How many Republican ‘Budget-Cutters’ have been on the front lines, FIGHTING these fires, that they helped cause?

    • notafemnista

      Malarkey.

  • Hidan

     The health care reform is crap and forces Americans (like in Ma) to buy crappy Health Insurance or face a fine (now by the Fed’s). Such Crappy health Insurance still does not cover major incidents without an substantial co-pay.

     Than on top of that people who can’t afford crappy health insurance has to pay a fine  and people who get this crappy insurance most likely wouldn’t be able to afford to use it.  So we have once again Politicians will pat each other on the back while there success is really a corp give away.

    Total Fail…..

    • nj_v2

      It’s sad that so many people are applauding the ACA because everyone will get “health care” when, in fact what it does is it forces everyone to buy—as Hiden aptly describes—crappy insurance policies over which there’s no cost control. 

      The mere fact the the industry went along with this monstrosity should tell any reasonable person that this has nothing to do with what’s best for the people.

      The industry started to game the system from the getgo:

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/31/insurance-industry-alread_n_519503.html
      (Insurance Industry Already Finding Ways To Game New System)

      Look how they really care about “health”:

      http://abcnews.go.com/Health/w_DietAndFitness/health-insurance-companies-invest-billions-fast-food-stock/story?id=10392603#.T-2tGd0qkRg
      (Health Insurers Hedge Bets With Fast Food Stock)

      Oily Bomber hired a friggn’ insurance company executive to manage implementation of the monstosity:

      http://www.openleft.com/diary/19449/obama-hires-fmr-wellpoint-exec-to-implement-health-care-law
      (Obama Hires Former Wellpoint Exec to Implement Health Care Law)

      The law still leaves much of price control up to “the market.” Why this will fail:

      http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/24
      (The Debilitating Myth of the ‘Free Market’ Alternative)

    • Don_B1

      Those who truly are unable to afford health insurance are able to get a subsidized policy through the exchanges that will exist by 2014 (the Connector exists in MA and makes policies available now; while they are not perfect, apparently most are pleased with the results).

      The policies which will meet the minimum standards of the PPACA are not available yet, though a few states (e.g., CA) have set up exchanges which are providing some help for those without employer-provided insurance.

      There is no way that the first round of what will be available is going to be both perfect and affordable, but give it a little time and some relatively small but necessary tweaks.

      What the PPACA does is demand that everyone buy an insurance policy and will help them determine what a policy does cover and does not. Insurance companies will not be allowed to play the “bait and switch” game as they have in the past.

      And if you want to have a health insurance policy and have the money to purchase one, then the PPACA is not “forcing” you to do anything. It is “forcing” those who either think they are invincible or just don’t want to spend their money for insurance and count on getting “free” (to them) health care in emergencies to have to pay at least a bit to exercise that desire.

  • John in Amherst

    There has been much speculation on how the ACA ruling will galvanize and fire up the GOP.  Wishful thinking, I’d say.  This ruling will allow the President to have a second chance to explain and sell this complex legislation.  (Hopefully he has learned from his mistakes…)  In the process, it will highlight Romney’s personal flip-flopping on health care, and the lack of any concrete GOP plan to remedy the health care problem.  It also preempts the critique from the right that the administration spent most of its time and effort on a bill that didn’t pass constitutional muster, and prevents the demoralization on the Democratic side had the ACA been declared unconstitutional.  It buys time for provisions of the bill to take effect.  Finally, it opens a gap for independents who might have veered right at the polls had the ACA act been deemed unconstitutional to reconsider.  The net advantage of this ruling goes to the Democrats.  Now if they can just make good use of it…

    • Azra

      Fingers crossed.

  • J__o__h__n

    Why is Romneycare fine for Mass. but not for the rest of Americans?  What an east coast elitist!

    • feettothefire

       This is one Republican’s simply can’t explain. Their presidential nominee doesn’t believe in government mandating healthcare, unless he’s the one doing the mandating. One by one they’ll decry the notion of govt. mandated healthcare, while simply ignoring what their boy did in Massachusetts. Or they’ll try
       the stupid “states rights” dodge, which will mean they apparently have no problem with state government mandates. Do you think Republicans think state governments are justified in mandating the purchase of healthcare coverage for it’s citizens? I sure don’t. Maybe some of them will explain it to us today.

      • MrNutso

        Mitt Romeny is only about doing what gets Mitt Romeny elected.  In the Senate race it was being a better friend to gays then Ted Kennedy.  For Governor it was doing what ever get him elected in liberal MA.  Same for Pres., except the positions now have to be changed.
        Frankly, he’d have a better chance as a 3rd way guy than as a Republican.

        • TFRX

          “Third way”?

          The only way he’s gotten on the ticket is being more rightward than Obama, in fits and starts, depending on whom one talks to. In the middle between a Santorum-type and a centristish Dem (mainly offering policies of ’80s Republicans) he’d be a nobody.

          At least with the “third way” he’d only have to worry about being outcharmed by Mayor Bloomberg and Joe “Droopy Dog” Lieberman.

          • J__o__h__n

            Perhaps third way means his shift from 1 moderate to 2 severe conservative and his etech-a-sketch back to 3 moderate for November.

        • Azra

          You’re certainly right about positions changing. In Mitt’s case, they change too rapudly too follow. We don’t ask what he’s saying today, we wonder what has changed from one minute to the next.

      • Azra

        They can explain it very well, since it was their idea. They all thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread (just ask Chuck Grassley) . . . until it became part of Obamacare.

    • Dave

      Oh that pesky Constitution. Irrelevant to you. Our Federal government has limited powers. Rest reserved for the states. Protects against abusive power and tyranny. But  of course tyranny is so…… 1800′s! What me worry!?!

      How do you propose we protect ourselves from the growing tyranny of collusion between the Government and Corporate elite? Our current health care system is precisely an example of it.

      Power to the States and People, competition of models and ideas, and limiting Federal one size fits all power and “cooperation” with corporations is the best we can do.

      We don’t outlaw business and corporations, we make them compete, and police them with government, not try to merge them or micromanage them.  Competitive Markets within a transparent Rule of Law is far superior to a system where the government tries to cooperate with or replace businesses thinking it can do better centrally.

  • J__o__h__n

    John Roberts is an evil genius.  He saved his legacy by agreeing with the obvious that Obamacare was constitutional but laid a trap for future decisions by restricting the commerce clause. 

  • Terry Tree Tree

    If we want to get rid of RomneyCare, we have to get rid of Romney?  Or at least NOT let him in office?
       Romney campaigns AGAINST himself, AGAIN?

  • feettothefire

    The shit will almost certainly hit the fan in Arizona in the months ahead. As more and more Americans are asked by bored police officers to prove citizenship, despite the fact that their families have been American citizens for generations. When it becomes obvious that most of those being asked for I.D.’s are Hispanic, despite the fact that the southwestern U.S. is packed with Hispanic citizens, they’ll become a laughingstock. I’m also quite sure we’ll be seeing an incident any time now, in which a U.S. citizen who chooses not to be bullied by Arizona’s new Gestapo-like demands gets bullied in some way by some overzealous cop. This will happen several time, at least. Then Arizona will be the butt of jokes, as the state that harasses it’s citizens for going shopping without their “papers.”

  • wauch

    What no Ann Curry chat this morning? Shame on you Tom for not covering real news!!!

    • Azra

      Yeah. What about Tom and Katy? Is no one distraught?

  • http://www.richardsnotes.org Richard

    While I’m glad the ACA (affordable care act) was upheld by the Supreme Court, I’m not all that happy with it as a whole because it’s the result of too much Republican influence in the sausage-making process and it’s not a great piece of legislation. Too much money is going to insurance companies and the rising costs and complexity of getting decent healthcare  isn’t directly addressed as it should be.

    I’m hopeful, as happened with the birth of social security and medicare, that over time this legislation will be more finely tuned. Social Security and Medicare are well designed social programs that really work. Anyone who says otherwise either has no experience with these programs or is spinning a Republican talking point.

    What we should have is Medicare for all. No Medicaid for poor people: just one service, the same one everyone in Congress has: Government run healthcare for all Americans. No private insurance companies involved, just one single payer service called Medicare supported by our federal income taxes.

    Private insurance will do just fine selling supplemental medical insurance (which I would be more than happy to buy), home and car insurance and all kinds of other insurance but basic health insurance (including basic dental) should be free for all Americans. We pay taxes, this is what we need to get in return.

    The fact that the people legislating this have excellent (Government run) health insurance that they will not give us and continue to badmouth as “socialism” is such an incredible lie that many of you have bought into it boggles the mind.

    • MrNutso

      The Republican influence is unfortunate, since no Republicans voted for the bill.  All done in an effort to make it bi-partisan that was never going to happen.

      • Azra

        Strange, because in the 80′s, (1986?), Republicans, led by Chuck Grassley, thought that health care reform, including this mandate, was the best plan in the world.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QME6C6XTBAYFEJP2GYDH3VQEMU Beat

      That is also my idea One Single Payer.

      Medicare is Socialize Medicine.

      Like you it really boggles my mind

  • JonS

    With Katrina vanden Heuvel as a guest commentator, I’m preparing in advance my barf medication. She is an attractive articulate spokeswoman for the left who lives in an alternative universe completely divorced from reality..

     

    • Iamnotageneral

      True dat.

  • Ren Knopf

    Did John Robert’s unforseen left turn -except for perhaps by Lawrence Tribe- dodge a bullet for SCOTUS? Would they have had to review the 1985 mandate for hospitals to provide care without regard to ability to pay had they ruled against Obamacare?

  • mary elizabeth

    The ACA is a step in the right direction.
    What is also needed is an appeal to the citizens to assume greater responsibility for their health.  21st century research is more closely defining what is optimal nutrition for humans and the info is out there, yet indiscriminate eating is evident all around regardless of already  serious diagnosis’.
    My family’s town is about to host the opening of two new fast food chains which I am sure will prosper.
    Also,  only 3% of our farmlands grow fruits and vegetables, the rest is subsidized soy and corn,  allowing for the increased price of fresh food while allowing for the poisonous HFcorn syrup in too many foods.
    We all can contribute to the health of the nation by reasonable lifestyle choices.

    • Azra

      Genetically-engineered soybeans and corn, no doubt. Prepoisoned.

      BUY FOOD WHICH HAS BEEN CERTIFIED AS ORGANIC.

  • TFRX

    Fortune magazine has a piece of real journalism on F&F.

    Can NPR spend a whole hour on this article?

    • JGC

      Thanks for that link.

      • TFRX

        Tangent: I don’t know your typical media habits, but the armchair media crit in me finds it interesting that this article isn’t splashed all over the broadcast and print outlets.

        I mean the ACA ruling is big, but when Matt Drudge, Michael Savage and RealClearPolitics find the time to smear Justice Roberts health (which was never a problem with them before), there should be some room out there.

    • MrNutso

      I saw this article, but did not get a chance to read it.  Printing it out now.

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

      The article drips with opposition to guns.  No thanks.

      • TFRX

        …and all of a sudden, Fortune is full of hippies.

        • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

          Hippies?

    • jefe68

      I read the article and it was very interesting.
      The part about the federal prosecutors in Arizona is very damaging and if the allegations are true this should be investigated. It seems that GOP was behind the laws that tied the hands of the ATF in this case and when it gets out of hand they now cry wolf. Talk about political hay.

      The thing that really got me is how anyone can go into any gun store and buy 50K worth of firearms without any questions asked. How is it that an unemployed kid can go into a gun store and spend 10 grand and this is not considered suspicious in Arizona, but if you’re Latino and driving a car it is.
        
      It is clear that the GOP is making a lot of hay about Fast and Furious. The conspiracy theories that the right is slinging about are in the range of absurd to really, really stupid.

      http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-june-26-2012-seth-macfarlane

  • JGC

    Bookers for On Point:

    Consider an hour with John Coates, the author of “The Hour Between Dog and Wolf: Risk Taking, Gut Feelings and the Biology of Boom and Bust”.  Coates was a former trader at Deutsche Bank who went on to get his Ph.D. in neurobiology, and is now at Cambridge. 

    He found escalating levels in testosterone in traders, creating he surmises, a feedback loop that encourages greater and greater risk, possibly giving a biological basis to bull market bubbles, Keynes “animal spirits” and Greenspan’s “irrational exuberance”. And Coates gives interesting ideas for bank management looking to mitigate risk from their traders.

    All members of Congress should read this book as they continue to argue about the wisdom of putting the brakes on Wall Street. 

  • Roy Mac

    Many teabagger heads exploding over the activist judges on the Supreme Court.  Rand Paul:  “Just because a couple of people on the Supreme Court declare something to be constitutional does not make it so.”  Apparently, you don’t need to pass high school civics in order to practice ophthamology in Kentucky.

    • TFRX

      Rand Paul has shown, time and again, that when the chips are on the table and he has to choose between the libertarian stuff he believes in, and being a Republican, it’s the latter pretty much every time.

      • Dave

        ? How is there anything Libertarian in the courts decision?  This was the ultimate libertarian issue, keeping the government limited, and Roberts went rogue authoritarian, like a good  establishment Republican, being sure his liberty talk never comes into being.

        Just curious what you mean.

        • TFRX

          Search up the plethora of legal peoples’ writings before the decision was handed down. They’re the experts.

          Say, considering how much you like telling lefties here “you’re doing it wrong!”, it must be fun having had to spent the entire Shrub presidency telling RedState and such how they were full of crap.

          By which I mean: Try playing your “liberty” gig against some of the batshit rightwingers when “libertarian” wasn’t shorthand for “useful tool to use against the left”, and you’ll see what real crazee looks like.

          • Dave

            I’ve always thought well-meaning lefties were smarter than establishment and red state (i.e. authoritarian, not liberty) types, and so wouldn’t even bother arguing with them.

            But the dogmatic DNC thinking and knee-jerk anti-liberty tendencies, have made me think the commitment to “left” is greater than the well-meaning.

          • Dave

            “…establishment Republican…”

          • TFRX

            Any time you want to explain how I’m a DNCer, be my guest.

            And when it comes to convincing other people, I’ll take a pass on worrying if a libertarian approves of me. It’s simply not worth the trail of breadcrumbs to get to where you are.

    • MrNutso

      Unless it’s something Paul supports, then the Court is upholding the law of the land.

    • feettothefire

       Did he really say that? You’ve got to be kidding.The Supreme Court doesn’t decide if something is constitutional?  People actually think this guy has something to add?

    • Dave

      Today’ supreme court is just and unelected benevolent dictatorship, since decades of well-meaning progressivism and discretion, instead of respect for Rule of Law and the founding notion of Limited government, have reached their ultimate end.

      Now we have nowhere to turn when the benevolent dictators go too far.

      • Roy Mac

        So…what are you saying?  The Supreme Court has worked itself out of a job by being too just and benevolent and un-bought?  Seems like those would be good qualities in a court.

    • jefe68

      Amazing, just shows you how regressive these rubes are.
      I read of some of the tea party calling for an armed coup d’état.

      Rand Paul needs to take a civics class.
      Does he think the same about the licensing board in his state? He’s a doctor just because he says he is?

  • Bethrjacobs

    coverage for the ritch while working women like me go to tax jail

    • Adks12020

      debtor prisons are illegal and have been for a long, long time

  • KarenW

    The tide has turned and now it’s back to we the people.  One of the truly intelligent supreme court justices, Roberts knew that he couldn’t deny the majority again

    • Bethrjacobs

      he is nothing more then a coward wake up hope you enjoy prison food we who can’t pay will go to tax jail count on it

  • Gerald Fnord

    The insurance companies were against the Act’s being struck down, and Mr Roberts has always been extremely corporate-friendly.

    I doubt he would have voted as he had if Kennedy had voted to uphold.

  • Iamnotageneral

    We all knew it was a tax, the guy loves taxes.

  • Iamnotageneral

    I applaud the bipartisanship that finds Holder in contempt!  Let’s have more of that!!

    • Adks12020

      not exactly bipartisan when 108 dems walked out and didn’t even vote.

      • Jefferson Little

        who needs those losers
        you can’t deny the bipartisanship no matter how much you squirm

    • MrNutso

      Not bipartisan.  Only members of the NRA party voted for it.

  • Bethrjacobs

    katrina your such a man working women like me will go to tax jail while your ilk enjoy yourselves over this

    • Iamnotageneral

      cat fight, me like

    • TFRX

      Gee, your numerous posts are so rambling and unwieldy I can’t figure out if there’s something you’re trying to get across.

      And, yes, please call another liberal woman “butch” or such. It’s so becoming on you.

      • Iamnotageneral

        cat fight, me like

    • Iamnotageneral

      Jack says you’re not well compensated.  He knows you so well! 

  • Greg

    This decision is mysterious only if you don’t understand the big picture.

    The Affordable Care Act is a BAIL OUT TO HEALTH INSURANCE AND PHARMA COMPANIES.

    This Supreme Court is first and foremost corporate.

    The right and left bases need to believe that there is a difference between THEIR GUYS.

    SOMEONE WAS GOING TO HAVE TO THROW IT SO THAT THE CORPORATIONS WON, as usual.

    Roberts was the most likely because he is not viewed as radically RIght as the other 3.

    You guys are making me laugh at your twisting in the wind to explain his vote when it is clear as day if you realize the truth about the Supreme Court.

    The Supreme Court are there to serve corporations.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    The Court has been perceived by the right as a department of the Democratic Party for a long time.  Saving it in the opinion of less than half the country really isn’t salvation.

    • TFRX

      At some point “perceived by the right” is a phrase which starts to lose meaning.

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

        And you’re illustrating how you’re blinded by your position.

        • TFRX

          I know the low-information media, and the people who think they’re being informed by it.

          When the mainstream media starts differentiating between how something is perceived by the right, and reality, you may have something.

          When the Beltway Inbreds pull their heads out of their little circles and when they stop taking 80% of their cues from Fox/Drudge (AndThereforePolitico), I’ll stop pointing it out.

          • TFRX

            (And I don’t consider you one of the low-information voters.)

  • troll_doll

    Huge giveaway to the insurance industry. Move Social Secuity to mandatory 401K funds?

  • ulTRAX

    One of the guests made the claim that NEVER BEFORE has Congress mandated citizens purchase a product from a private business. SURE IT HAS… the Militia Acts of 1792 REQUIRED all militia members to arm and equip themselves.

    That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months
    thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet
    and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to
    contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket
    or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or
    with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to
    the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so
    armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service,
    except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear
    without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with
    a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the
    passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required,
    shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and
    every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and
    accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all
    suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.

    http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm

     

    • Conner44

      You have to be the worst cutter ‘n paster on the planet! 

      • Ray in VT

        Do you have any actual criticism of what ulTRAX actually posted?

        • Conner44

          What are you, his girlfriend?

          • Ray in VT

            Thank you for supporting my point.

        • ulTRAX

          Conner44… and I assume it’s a reference to his IQ, is satisfied being a gnat. There’s no evidence he’s even capable of an intelligent post.

          • Conner44

            Where’d you copy that one from genius?  You’re a joke!

          • Steve_T

             Haven’t you figured out who it is?
            It’s our old fiend.

          • Ray in VT

            Who, ol’ Moda Warren?

          • ulTRAX

             For the good of the forum, Moda had to leave… wink wink!

          • Ray in VT

            A lot of name calling this morning: dimwit, tool.  Seems to be a lot of anger today from a certain segment.

          • Azra

            I noticed that, too, because they’re usually so cocky.

      • ulTRAX

         Three responses to my posts and you’re STILL incapable of an intelligent response. Strike three… you’re out Einstein!

        • Conner44

          LOL, you’re unreadable.  Please copy someone who makes sense.  You’re a joke!

      • jefe68

        I know it’s hard, but try to use the gray matter in-between your ears.

  • Janie

    My husband & I are small business owners. We are worried that this law will mandate employers provide insurance to our employees.  We would not be able to afford that!  Please address this part of the law on your program today. I think the people that are celebrating are counting on a free handout from their employer. They may find themselves out of a job if this is indeed a mandate.

    • http://www.facebook.com/stewsburntmonkey David Stewart

      Actually it is the opposite.  The ACA works to facilitate the separation of health insurance and the employer.

      • Greg

        So sad.

        People believe this is good for them rather then for the health insurance companies and corporations.

        Only wish it were true. Corporate law. 

        Corporations benefit by shifting costs to employees or offloading them all together.

        That junk insurance they are allowed to offer and qualify.

        • Dave

          But Kool-Aid is so…… tasty!

    • Azra

      If you employ fewer than fifty workers, no need to worry.

    • Azra

      If that’s why they’re celebrating, they don’t much about this law either.

  • MrNutso

    Why ares Limbuagh’s comments relevant?

  • TFRX

    Bobby Jindal says “Roberts is playing to the editorial pages of the WaPo”?

    Bobby Jindal needs to read the WaPo more often. (And that’s a recommendation I don’t make very often lately, seeing as how the WaPo’s editorial pages have turned to crap.)

  • M Loomis

    Does there exist ONE cognizant human in this country who believes John Roberts would vote against sending a guaranteed 30 million new customers to the doorsteps of Big Pharma and the myriad health insurance robbers?!? Anyone? Can we please stop pretending to be absolutely stumped at what this corporate shill does? 

  • Gerald Fnord

    They must be rejoicing in the halls of the Heritage Foundation….

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Caller Beth is exactly right.  Without a public option, this is going to end up costing low income people more.

    • jefe68

      It depends on how states deal with this.
      But I bet this will be a mess and not solve the problem of health care costs and our dysfunctional market based system.

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

        Exactly.  Many states didn’t want to comply and won’t be required to do so.  Why would anyone think that they will magically do a good job in putting healthcare reform into action?

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Vanden Heuvel, answer the question, rather than repeating your theology.

  • Dave

    The Court rewrote the legislation. We have no true Rule of Law, no separation of powers anymore.

    A Health Care Tax couldn’t pass the legislative process. The Mandate was Unconstitutional use of Commerce Clause.

    So they mixed government functions and played dictator.

    People should be alarmed.

    Benevolent Dictatorship over Rule of Law is all great, until the benevolence runs out.

    The Folks who think our Constitutional Self Government and Rule of Law, not Men, founding ideals are no longer necessary to preserve freedom and democratic vibrancy, are ignorant tools of the Corporatist, State Capitalist, Globalist tyranny.

    Good intentions are not enough to justify giving up our protections against tyranny.

    • http://www.facebook.com/stewsburntmonkey David Stewart

      The Court didn’t rewrite anything.  They simply recognized that a mandate is a tax, in that it is a levy by the government on citizens.  In this case the tax comes with a universal exemption and then this exemption is revoked for those who can afford to buy health coverage, but elect not to.  

      • Dave

        Except for that pesky procedural reality that “Tax” would not have gotten through the legislature as the People didn’t want it. Then again, this never was for the People. It was for the State Capitalist elites who get to claim progress and enjoy power and profits as we go bankrupt.

        • TFRX

          So, no righties were calling it a tax when it passed?

          It must be ignorant bliss as a libertarian to take everything from the right-wing echo chamber as gospel and pretend you’re informed.

  • Outcropacres

    Is it naive (sp) to believe that interpretation of the constitution is independant of party agendas? Would appreciate discussion of that aspect rather than speculation as to court motives.

  • Adks12020

    The recent caller from New York has no idea what she is talking about.  She could afford health insurance in New York right now.  I made $20,000 in New York a few years ago and had Healthy New York insurance.  I paid $100/month.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    We don’t care, at this moment, where the mandate was hatched, and that wasn’t Beth’s point.  Vanden Heuvel, answer the question or shut up.

  • Greyman

    Which Katrina vanden Heuvel is on today’s show: the Princeton grad, the Nation editor, or the Institute for Policy Studies board member?

  • MrNutso

    Doesn’t he mean getting rid of Romenycare?

  • Endof4th

    I don’t understand how people overlook that a similar tax  already exists in a different sphere.  If you don’t have a mortgage, you pay more to the government than someone who does.  That is, the government insists you enter a business agreement with a mortgage broker or you pay a penalty. Also, everyone participates in the housing market.

  • Charlie Mc

    Stuffing the Supreme Court has been over the years the chosen path to Liberal or Conservative success, but all it took was one chief justice with Solomon’s wisdom to “stuff it” to all the know-it-all politicians and cut through all the political crap and accomplish something critically important for the well being of all Americans

  • Robot’s Rules Of Order

    So much for originalism: a couple of the Founders thought differently from Scalitomas and Kennedy:
        http://consortiumnews.com/2012/04/02/the-founders-musket-mandate/

  • Iamnotageneral

    I’m glad we get to talk more about healthcare as an election issue!  The government blows!

    • Zero

       Only when republicans are in office.

  • Worried for the country(MA)

    I applaud Katrina’s honesty when she admits Obamacare is just the beginning in the attempt for the big government types to take over our lives.
     

    • Dave

      She is horrifyingly smug and self righteous. Well suited for benevolent dictator.

      • J__o__h__n

        Did you run out of new names?  Same phrases (“benevolent dictator”) too.

        • Dave

          The name fits, why stop? Little groups of elites running our economy and lives for our own good. I guess I could use plural, dictators, or switch to Politburo.

          Too bad these well meaning little groups (if you have such faith that they are, will remain well meaning; power doesn’t corrupt does it?) lack the dynamism, idea generation and trial and error evolution of free people and free markets that we need to be free and prosper as best we can.

          • J__o__h__n

            By running out of new names, I meant “Dave.”  I used to your same simplistic solution to every problem. 

          • Dave

            How is the gestalt consensus of the free ideas and actions of individuals, working themselves out morally, rationally, pragmatically, more simplistic than the top down approach you have such faith in?  It’s precisely the over-simplicity of top down management, the utopian alternative to the almost unfathomable complexity of all the individual behaviors that would go into the liberty gestalt, that is the problem.

            You just don’t trust humanity and an equally enforce Rule of Law for all. You trust elites.

          • J__o__h__n

            How do you reconcile your favorite phrase “rule of law” with your desire to have the market determine everything?  An unregulated market will result in power accumulating to an even more elite few than the current system.  

          • jimino

            You could just move to where your ideas have taken root.  Where would that be?

  • MrNutso

    What do the polls say when people asked about the individual parts of ACA?

  • Ellen Dibble

    The Roberts decision, as I recall, said that he wasn’t going to protect us from what our elected representatives came up with.  So he is not saying what he thinks ought to be done, “just” what is constitutional in what Has Been Done.  The flaws are manifold, and we have a few months to discuss with candidates what needs to happen next.

    • Dave

      He ruled on a Tax issue that wasn’t there, since the commerce issue was doomed.

  • Conner44

    Good luck Jan!  You’ve got three wackos to deal with.

  • Dave

    Socialism and Communism are bankrupt, failed ideas.

    Freedom and Markets aren’t perfect, but its the best history has seen.

    The world, the universe will never be perfect, with perfect “fairness” and perfect “justice”.

    That’s reality.

    Socialist/Communist Utopian Ends, that will never materialize, are not worth the freedom lost by the Means.

    • Zero

      I don’t know what planet you are looking for, but Mars and Uranus can’t be too far away.

      • Dave

        Earth and Reality are here, now. It’s the Big government, debt spending, money-printing, technocratic ruling utopians and elitists of both parties who would have us believe there is another planet.

        • Zero

          I think you should have a global perspective before use republican buzz words like “Big government.” Then once you are not taking in by rhetoric, you might have a glimpse at reality.     

    • Iamanotageneral

      True dat.

  • MrNutso

    Great comment Jack Beatty!

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Didn’t one of the justices say that single-payer would have been constitutional?

  • Irene Moore

    In looking at the premiums and cost-sharing  that a single mother of 4 with an income of $22,000 makes her annual premium about $800

    • jefe68

      Not in Massachusetts. Beth would get very low premiums or it would be free if she had children.
      If the ACA does work, and that’s a big if, it should take care of people like Beth.

      The bottom line is we have a very messed up market based health care system. It’s absurd and the real winners are the insurance companies. 

      What we, as a nation need is a complete overhaul of how we pay and administer health care. The thing is this is not likely to happen. I dislike ACA as I’m a single payer advocate. Health care costs are going to bankrupt this nation, it’s already one of the largest causes of bankruptcy of individuals. This is the reality, and we as a nation are not dealing with this. Our politicians, well listen to these people. They have the best health care our money can buy and the ones who are opposed to reform, the GOP, should maybe put their actions where their mouths are.
      I think health care is a right, as one caller said.

      Single payer for all.

      • Azra

        There’s no getting around it. Health care IS a right.

  • Scott B, Jamestown NY

    Beth(?) only makes $24Kyr, so she would qualify for Medicaid in NY, and most states, plus, at that income, with Medicaid being expanded, would be able to get a good portion of her insurance paid, in particular if it cost more than 9% of her income.  She’d be better served listening to more NPR and less Fox News.

    • Conner44

      You should listen.  Medicaid voluntary dimwit.

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

      She would qualify for Medicaid?  She’d have to be disabled or pregnant, no?

  • http://twitter.com/Astraspider Astraspider

    Ms. Crawford is wrong. The people who didn’t like the law wouldn’t have voted for Obama no matter the outcome. What this does is paint the law with a patina of legitimacy and revives the sense that the President is a leader. That won’t move the people who hated the law anyway, but it will persuade some people in the middle.

  • Gregory Null

    I turned off your show when I heard the Rush Limbaugh clip played today. I listen to your show to hear soundbites from experts and policy-makers, not entertainers. If you want to balance it out, get a rebuttal from Homer Simpson next time.

  • Michiganjf

    I disagree completely with Ms. Crawford’s take on the politics of the SCOTUS decision.

    This case and the decision will flood the airwaves with details of The Affordable Care Act for months to come, helping Americans to finally make a connection between all of the great things the bill provides (which Americans love in poll after poll) and the bill in its entirety.

    Americans will come to understand this was a very lucky win for ALL OF US!!

    • TFRX

      But Crawford’s a gatekeeper.

      Details of the ACA, which polls show people support, will only become part of the narrative if people like Crawford decide to make them “above the fold”- or subhed-worthy.

      Otherwise it’ll be Page B18 stuff, like “Republican governor of Hawaii confirms: Obama was born in Honolulu.”

  • manganbr

    What percentage of people who “disapprove” of this plan, actually want something more liberal? Isn’t it the case that a majority of Americans either support this plan OR want something even more expansive like a government option or a single payer system? The poll numbers can’t be taken at face value; we need a poll that asks people what kind of reform they prefer instead, to get a sense of where the country really stands. 

    • Sara

      People who support single payer should get on board with this.  It is a way to get there.   

      • Bethrjacobs

        why it only helps with money the rest of us get nothing but possible jail time for not paying thhe tax

        • Azra

          Why wouldn’t you be covered?

    • Zero

      People only hate Obamacare in the abstract.  But when the individual policies of the law are polled, America overwhelmingly love it. 

      This is not atypical.  Most of Obama’s policy (even amongst republican voters) polls well, so long as Obama’s name isn’t attached to the policy.  But when the pollsters ask about the same policy with Obama’s name attached, the popularity goes down.

      One word explanation: propaganda.  

      • Bethrjacobs

        that is incorrect 68% hate it and for a good reason if the working pooor could afford coverage we would get it who wants to go to tax jail

        • TFRX

          If you’re going to type so sloppily you may wish to demonstrate that you’ve read what you’re replying to.

        • Zero

          You can google the polling for yourself. 

      • Azra

        You’re absolutely correct. Right before Affordable Health Care was even passed, 76% of Americans were in favor of the whole thing. With enough lies, and enough gazillionaires paying for false advertising, the propaganda worked, for awhile. Before the law was passed, we knew what it would do for us. Then the brainwashing took over, some people forgot the truth, because they didn’t bother to do fact checks. Those people just have to be reminded of why they needed health insurance so much in the first place, which is what is being done. That number will return to 76%, and might even go higher. It can’t get much higher than that, because the rest are those who will profit if we lose out. It won’t take long for every reasonabe person to re-learn about our new security blanket.

    • MrNutso

      That would be me.

  • matt

    The highly-intelligent Jonathan Adler writes:Initial Thoughts on the Health Care Ruling: Holding that it would be unconstitutional to terminate existing Medicaid funds to states that refuse to go along with the Medicaid expansion is quite significant, particularly as seven justices joined this result. While the holding here may not go beyond the limits articulated in South Dakota v. Dole, the Supreme Court has not limited the exercise of the spending power to impose conditions on states since the New Deal and, again, seven justices endorsed this result. Going forward, I expect this portion of the opinion to have the greatest practical impact…I think that Jonathan Adler is likely to be right.

  • Laura

    Got some sympathy for Beth. My husband and I are very healthy 40 year olds. We are under- and unemployed. Our MassHealth Connector health plan costs us over $1000 a month. It is a huge burden. Thinking about dropping coverage and paying the penalty.

    • Bethrjacobs

      I am very sorry loook out it willl get worse

    • Azra

      The “penalty” could be your life, or your home. No one can predict when a serious accident, storm, earthquake, or very serious, (maybe terminal), illness might strike any of us. Surgery, long hospital stays, (coma, etc.), very expensive, protracted treatments, therapies, and out-of-control pricing of medications, are among the reasons for people being dropped by their insurance companies, having to pay more for their insurance, losing their jobs, their homes, and everything they own. Many formerly successful Americans, are now living in their cars, homeless shelters, or on the street, just because they got sick, or had an accident, and didn’t have health insurance, or their insurance company, (the one they had been paying for years, so they would be taken care of if something happened to them), refused to pay ANYTHING, not even the thousands, or millions, of their own money, which had already been paid to the insurance company! When these people have run out of all funds, and don’t have a job, it really gets scary. Once you’re out of the hospital, you’re not feeling well, and your home is gone. You have nothing, except astronomical medical bills, and no way to pay them.

      Obamacare will give peace of mind, knowing that whatever happens, you will never have to worry about insurance companies raising your rates when you get sick or are involved in a serious accident, and they can’t refuse to pay your medical bills. They can no longer deny coverage to women, or to anyone with any pre-existing conditions, like having had tonsillitis when they were 2 years old. There are many more safeguards which were put in place for our protection. It’s up to you, of course, if you want to gamble, but it’s not a risk I’m willing to take, and now I’ll finally be able to have health insurance, and peace of mind. What a huge relief it will be when that day arrives.

  • Ellen Dibble

    At $20,000 a year, the caller Beatty is talking about would get a break from Romneycare/Obamacare.  She cites $400 a month, which she can’t afford to use.  I sympathize with that.  She probably has or would have to pay several thousand dollars before the coverage kicks in.  In my experience, monthly payments are about $750 a month, so if it is subsidized, it might be $400.  
       But how does this square with the $95 a year “tax” or penalty, which moves up to $600 a year.  That wouldn’t cover the kind of free care that the person can draw on, whether or not that care is emergency room care or preemptive care.      The root seems to be the need to keep profits in health care, to offer what provides the maximum profits where possible.  I don’t know what kind of bed the Big Pharma and the Big Insurers are sleeping in, but I suspect it’s owned by certain investment strategies.

    • Bethrjacobs

      I am over 200% of poverty line must pay 2-3% of income in
      fine or 8.5% for premiums  I cannot
      afford to use and I suspect any misrepresentati0n or mistake in preexisting
      conditi9on will be tax fraud the fine goes up and up and only basic basic ” bend over and cauh care is covered as free” if any one actualy ones to have the cure it is not free and low cost hospitals in Mass. were raided and closed so folks (say a family of four making up to $88k) will not have inexpensive care simply will have no money left or place to get care because it still causts too much.Basicly will find out you are sick for “free” but will not be able to do anything about it

      • jimino

         So what do you want? 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BFQVQQBOBBKLBTILJSHLVSNOJE SIX

    If Jack Beatty believes Americans don’t care about this legislation he is sadly mistaken.
    I don’t think he does believe that, he is simply echoing the administrations party line.

    • Iamanotageneral

      True dat.

  • Conner44

    Katrina blames the media, what a tool!

  • Worried for the country(MA)

    68% of the people wanted SCOTUS to strike down Obamacare.

    Now the only remaining remedy is to have our elected representatives repeal Obamacare. 

    This is huge for Romney because now the only way to repeal Obamacare is to elect Romney.  This is why Romney raised so much money yesterday.
     

  • Steven

    Jack is right that the Court would have been seen as a public enemy by at least half the country if it had not let stand this unloved bill. When the members of a court vote in a completely predictable,partisan way its knowledge, intelligence and wisdom become irrelevant. A court of low paid political hacks could do as much. As it is, nobody loves this but the Republicans have no alternative. The conservatives didn’t care enough to promote a health care plan when they held power while they were riding our economy into ruin. Like Jack I would rather have single payer but we have a split Congress that came up with this and only an activist Court would mess with this bill. 
     power 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/6E5M4YACHDJ7AFL5D2XK3IMCL4 James P.

      The conservatives were never interested in good goverancece or healcare policy. Unfortunately, gridlock is often the goal of the, if you win I lose U.S. Congress. Most negotiations about policy and good governance lead to a dead end.
      I   agree with this Salladin comment from Frumm’s Waterloo blog repost “For some reasons passing understanding, the GOP truly believes that the President is illegitimate. Due to this, any laws passed should be overridden. This becomes easier when the opposition is absolute. No bipartisan support on any policies means that politics triumphs over governance. Good for the GOP in the short term, bad for the country and GOP in the long term, though as its easier to be intransigent as the minority party, but when you’re in the majority you actually need to govern. Something the new Conservative wing of the party seems not to understand.”

  • MrNutso

    Right on caller!  Even better well said from a small business owner who wants to provide insurance to their employee’s.

  • Scott B, Jamestown NY

    On Point didn’t play the best part of what Romney said, which was that he going to tear down “Obamacare” then make sure that kids can stay on their parents insurance, people can’t be thrown off roles or denied insurance because of preexisting conditions, expand Medicare, and every issue that Obamacare covers. Are Jon Stewart and I the only ones that caught that?

    • TFRX

      Jon Stewart is the only one on national teevee who seems to have noticed that.

      All those savvy network people, all those “liberals” (some would describe them as), haven’t noticed.

    • feettothefire

       Please forgive us for missing that. It’s getting harder every day to listen to the fraud speak. I guess we should be more vigilant. Now on top of supporting mandates while not supporting mandates, he supports Obamacare while not supporting Obamacare. This guy becomes more of a joke with each issue he addresses. This is evidence of what a waste of time the whole primary season is every four years. It’s boring kids stuff. Once  candidates become the obvious nominee and must actually begin to SAY something that matters, they start showing us what hypocrites they are. Romney is particularly good at it. Thanks for the heads up.

    • Azra

      I saw that bit also. It was really good! Should be able to catch reruns; I saw it this morning. Think it might be on again at about 7 or 8 tonight? The new one will be broadcast at 10 CT, reruns at 8:30 a.m., (at least weekdays, and on my cable network).

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BFQVQQBOBBKLBTILJSHLVSNOJE SIX

    What this decision has done is prove that President Obama and the Democrats were lying about this partisan left wing legislation saying it would not raise taxes on anyone making less than $200,000.
    Roberts didn’t make this decision in order to “save the court”. He stated plainly that he couldn’t say if Obamacare was good or bad for the Country and that the decision shouldn’t be taken as agreeing with the Legislation.
    If this is such a good thing why are so many groups being exempted? Why did Congress exempt itself?
    We need Healthcare reform, but not a government take over of the entire system, and that is where we are headed.
    Why doesn’t the media take a look at this in it’s entirety, with all it’s implications?
    I hope the American people will wake up and this President and the far left in the Congress are soundly defeated in November.

    • mary elizabeth

      What is yours and the Repubs answer to this crisis that has gone on unresolved for generations?  Is the private health care system  “working”  as compared to countries who have single payer?

      • Dave

        We don’t have a private health care system. We have a collusive corporate insurance/Government system.

        A private system with transactions between individuals and doctors, would be vastly different and more affordable for preventative and basic health care, with catastrophic insurance there for big disease conditions.

        • jimino

          Name one place and time in the history of mankind where your proposal has been implemented and worked.

          To the contrary, T.R. Reid’s “The Healing of America” can show you numerous instances in which the exact opposite has worked.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BFQVQQBOBBKLBTILJSHLVSNOJE SIX

        Mary, Whatever the best answer is for healthcare reform, it will need to be determined as a result of “honest”, bi-partisan debate.
        There is no way this totally partisan, far left wing legislation is the best course for our Country.
        How about you answer my question Mary, if legislation is so good why are there so many groups exempted, including the Congress.

        • TFRX

          “Honest bipartisan debate” went out the window either when the polls closed on election night 2008 or when NPR felt the need to discuss “both sides of the story” on whether candidate Obama was: 1) American-born and 2) a Socialist.

          Any time you want to make the right come back to reality, we’ll be here for it.

        • jimino

          You need that many words to say “Neither I nor any Republican in Congress has any idea.”?

    • Zero

      Government take over of the whole system would look like this: all private companies involved with healthcare would be band.  Government would run a not-for-profit health industry where the goal is to break even, being it would be against the law for government to make money by charging 600 dollars for crutches, per se. 

      There would be no need for Medicaid and Medicare because it would all be encompassed under the general healthcare.  Everybody would pay into healthcare like they pay into Medicaid and Medicare.  Government would open up its only medical supply manufacturing company, and doctors would be government employees.

      Now that is a government take over of healthcare. 

    • Azra

      This law doesn’t raise anybody’s taxes.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BFQVQQBOBBKLBTILJSHLVSNOJE SIX

    There is no such thing as free healthcare!

    • Zero

      But there is such a thing as everybody being about to see a doctor no matter what their income level.

  • NorMassGuy

    I think that from a business point of view, the presidential election is now about investment and consistency: Do you put your money behind 5 years of predictable legislation you’ve already seen and for which you’ve already planned, or do you fund a candidate who represents 4 years of chaos as a new executive, a split congress and a divided GOP try to disassemble, re-purpose and reword the ACA?  This can only be good for Obama’s campaign.

  • Dave

    Just because pandering Republicans support unsustainable, corporatist collusion between government and Health Care companies, along with Democrats, doesn’t make it right.

    When Communists like Katrina compromise, we get State-Capitalism, where they try to manage the market but just end up with corrupt, failed markets that benefit revolving door political/corporate elites.

    Competition in Markets, real competition and consumer choice are the best watchdogs for prices and freedom and regular people, not well-meaning micromanagers of our society.

    • Zero

      Glass-Steagall was signed into law in the 1930s and protected the country for 70 years before Clinton repealed it.  What was wrong with Glass-Steagall?  Name one way that it harmed the country. 

    • jimino

      Even if your theoretical point was true, if you think the provision of health care in our country is even remotely a market-based system, next time you make an appointment with a doctor or get a medical service from anyone, such as x-rays or blood tests, ask them to tell you in advance what it will cost.  I guarantee you they will have no idea whatsoever.  Is that your idea of how a market should work?

      • TFRX

        It is a market-based system!

        Well, a bazaar-based system.

        The next time Dave gets carried into a hospital, unconscious, he’ll get billed by about ten different entities, and wonder what happened to the old family doctor he imagines exists now like it did 150 years ago.

      • Dave

        That’s the point! Just because we don’t have a real market, and have an inflated, collusion based system instead, we just give up? Fight for the market!

        • Dave

          Not only give up, but throw more tax-dollars, debt, and printed money at it?

  • JIMTinSC

    Tom:

    I appalud the Supreme Court for upholding the health care law, the President for finally getting this done and indeed Mitt Romney for writing it.  However, Jack is so right when he talked about the working poor.  1 out of 2, 1 out of 2 Americans are either below the poverty line or two or three paychecks away from disaster.  It has been this way for too long.  We can not sustain our democracy until we take this issue head on.  America needs a real war of poverty-part of that war IS that healthcare is a right, but let us move on to where having a job and living income is a right!  We need push the President and Democrats to do this.  You know great Presidents and leaders are not born they are made, they are pushed.  Lincoln had Frederick Douglas, FDR had the people , LBJ had MLK…

    • Azra

      I’m with you.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/6E5M4YACHDJ7AFL5D2XK3IMCL4 James P.

    What role will negotiations over extending the bush tax cuts play on negotiations on healthcare changes? 60 votes are needed for anything to move in the Senate and Democratic Senators now have a big carrot.

    Jim Iowa City

  • ulTRAX

    From page 51 of HERITAGE’S FOUNDATION’S 1989 HEALTH CARE PLAN: A National Health System for America: Under this arrangement, all households would be required to
    protect themselves from major medical costs by purchasing health insurance or enrolling in a prepaid health plan. The degree of financial  protection can be debated, but the principle of mandatory family protection is central to a universal health care system in America.

    The GOP was for this plan before they were against it! ROTF

    • MrNutso

      I thought only John Kerry was allowed to be for something before he was against it?

      • J__o__h__n

        That’s why he is playing Romney in Obama’s debate prep.

      • J__o__h__n

        That’s why he is playing Romney in Obama’s debate prep.

    • Dave

      at least 2 wrongs make a right today!

      • Dave

        Thats how spoiled, misguided, sense of entitled we are today, we turn blind eyes to important core principles that protect our very freedom and independence, a rare historical gift, for our quick fix. We will regret it.

        • ulTRAX

          Let me see if I get your argument straight. Here’s a method of funding to PAY for a program… and we’re spoiled rotten entitlement whores. But it We The People have pissed away some 15 TRILLION on ourselves in the past 30 years… the biggest Free Lunch in history, that we STILL refuse to pay for… and the Right actually whines they’re overtaxed… that’s NOT a sense of entitlement?   

    • Willaim

      The GOP position has evolved since 1989.

      • ulTRAX

        That’s a nice way of saying the GOP has become a party of extremist loons. 

      • jefe68

        The correct word is devolved. Into a party of regressive extremist.

      • feettothefire

         Not according to Mitt and Newt. They each believe in government mandates. They both entered the 2012 presidential race. That doesn’t sound like much evolution in 23 years to me.

        • ulTRAX

           That’s the irony here… Romney thought Mass RomneyCare would be his ticket to the Whitehouse because he believed he solved an intractable problem and it could be the model for the nation. Now, because the Right wing base has been so propagandized that a right wing plan is a threat to their freedom, Romney’s forced to denounce his only accomplishment.

          Welcome to the whacky world of the Orwellian Right.

  • Greyman

    While Comrade Katrina complains about media terminology, she can also take into account Obama’s persistent insistence that his PPACA did NOT constitute a new form of “taxation”. Our Supreme Court has now ruled that the law be properly termed the PPACTA: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Tax Act. (Note to Jack Beatty: the tax rate for those 10 to 15 million Americans you cited will only go up, even if PPACTA survives the coming year.)

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    I’m still waiting for accurate statements about what healthcare reform will do for people who work, but whose income or medical conditions keep them from being able to afford insurance.  I’ve seen lots of statements of faith, but nothing that sounds reliable.

    • jimino

      Your question is extremely vague, but generally you will be able to get the premium cost and negotiation of medical cost benefits, currently available only to group policy participants, through state insurance exchanges, and be subsidized if unable to pay due to income level.  If you want accurate information, talk to a health insurance professional, not a pundit or political operative.

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         I don’t see how my comment was vague.  I identified a group of Americans and asked how this will benefit them.  Your answer is that they will get to spend money that they don’t have to buy something that’s likely to be worth little.  Got it.

        • jimino

          Have you spoken to someone who sells health insurance to individuals?  Try it before worrying yourself too much.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             You’re unaware, I take it, that insurance companies won’t sell to people with pre-existing conditions.

          • Azra

            They’ll HAVE to, in the not too distant future. It’s the law.

  • Richard Rozay

    Can we get a NWS warning next time you’re going to play audio of a woman sounding like shes having an orgasm? 

  • no name

    As usual govvernment radio chooses an inarticulate centrist to voice the opinion of the left. Van heuel panders down to obviously right wing neo-populist callers who are spewing out pre-planned right wing talking points andc meeanwhile she is unable to talk in even complete sentence fragments.  As usual the right spin dudes and dudettes have their ducks lined up while liberals are bound to turn victory into defeat.

    • feettothefire

      My god, here we go again. NPR is not “government” radio. It’s a private corporation that gets a small part of its budget from government. Like farmers. Like big oil. Like all the other private enterprises that get money from government through tax breaks and outright cash handouts. Will that myth never die?

      • no name

        I’m not your god and it is government radio. government pays for it with our tax money, congress and the government controls the board of directors and, as we saw when the government censored the gay Vermont farmer show on the government TV kids show, government controls the content of shows. When that happens in, say, Venezuala, the media and the amerikan government refers to it as govenrment controlled TV or radio.

        If it looks like a pig, if it sounds like a pig, if it smells like a pig, its a pig

        • feettothefire

           When did you fall on your head?

        • jefe68

          Wow, you are one deluded individual.
          If I was you I would get offline now.
          The government is monitoring your internet connection and I bet the ATF, FBI, DEA and the IRS are all on their way to your house.

          • feettothefire

             Could this be “He Whose Name Must Not Be Spoken” on even more acid than usual?

          • Steve_T

             yes!

      • Greyman

        Not quite: CPB is a “quasi-governmental” outfit, “a public/private partnership”, not entirely unlike Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I agree: end subsidies for ethanol production and tax breaks for big oil . . . and end ALL Federal funding for CPB/NPR/APM/PRI. (But here’s a question: if CPB/NPR/APM/PRI are eager to demonstrate their independence, why have they not institutionally begged the Feds to cut the “scant” tens or hundreds of millions in tax receipts they continue to receive?) 

        • feettothefire

           Why should NPR be expected to turn away government funds when no one else who receives them is. Big oil and Big farming, which together get enough moolah from the government to finance a few thousand NPRs, can keep the money, but shame on NPR?  And NPR is no more a “quasi-governmental” outfit than I am. The government can’t tell them what programming to provide. It can’t decide pay rates for employees. It can’t tell them how to allocate funds. It can’t shut them down. It can’s censor them. It can’t fire or hire the CEO. It gives them a small amount of money, as it does to many non-profit organizations. The government would probably give funds to FOX and MSNBC if they became non-profit and petitioned for the financial aid.

          • Greyman

            The “small amount of money” CPB received from the Federal government in FY 2012 totals over $445 million. THAT constitutes “quasi-governmental”, oh yes it does.

          • feettothefire

             So Big agriculture and Big oil, both of which receive far more money than NPR, must be quasi-governmental. And, just to clear things up for you, government must have at least some input into the operations of any outfit in order for that outfit to be considered quasi-governmental. NPR is a private corporation. you can call it whatever you want.

          • Greyman

            Alternatively: why should CPB/NPR/PRI/APM hog $445 million+ in Federal spending to entertain us with narrative journalism, trivia and variety shows, et cetera? why should so many NPR anchors and hosts garner six-figure salaries annually, several of them over $400,000 annually? why should the Federal government spend $445 million annually to subsidize American journalism and entertainment industries? why continue to support through Federal taxes a media mini-empire that succeeds only in reproducing the bilge generated in the commercial media? why oh why oh why?  

          • feettothefire

             If you think NPR’s programming is bilge, but listen to it anyway, you have a mental problem.                     The salaries aren’t your business or mine. It is after all, a private corporation. Private corporations pay their employees whatever they want. Maybe if NPR were a quasi-governmental organization someone else could have some control over salaries, but, alas, such is not the case.      Why should they get the money? I’ll tell you what. When all the rest of the folks in the country who feed at the trough of government funding, especially the big boys who get more money than NPR could ever dream of getting, I’ll start worrying about public radio.                         

          • Greyman

            The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is not now, and never has been, a fully private corporation: CPB remains a public-private partnership (which guarantees an outcome of divided loyalty: it will advertise itself as a “public good” while operating as much as it dares within the bounds of institutional self-preservation). CPB continues to receive Federal funding: otherwise, CPB would not have received $445 million+ in Federal expenditures for FY 2012. NPR, a recipient of funding in part from the CPB is thus also, IN PART, financed by the Federal government. Salaries paid to NPR anchors, hosts, reporters, editors, and producers are thus Federally subsidized. If you persist in wanting to think otherwise, simply call loudly for the end of all Federal support for the CPB, and you’ll hear plenty of squawking from NPR. (I protest too much, though: deep budget cuts are coming, and both CPB and NPR know this.) 

          • feettothefire

             Are you daft, man? Where did I claim that NPR gets no money from the feds. I acknowledged that reality several comments ago. Please, supply me with a quote stating otherwise. I’d like to revisit it. But, if you insist on claiming that NPR is a quasi-governmental entity because it receives govt. funding, you must apply that same designation to ANYONE who receives govt. funding. Telling me that subsidies to CPB are somehow different from subsidies to all the other recipients of federal subsidies  is as ridiculous a statement as you can make. Now, if you’d like to claim that big agriculture in this country is quasi-governmental, you’d be wrong. But at least you’d be consistent.

          • Greyman

            It’s really easy: CPB is a corporation that was set up by the Federal government.

          • Greyman

            Note here that, in my comment above, I explicitly labeled CPB as “quasi-governmental”. You then applied “quasi-governmental” explicitly to NPR. –so perhaps you’re only confusing yourself. And as I say below: what distinguishes CPB as a corporation are the facts of its instauration: it was born of the dual efforts of LBJ and Congress. The corporations you are ready to decry are those that were born entirely in the private sector, which often enough are not recipients of direct Federal infusions as beneficiaries of tax policies which, as PPACTA shows, can be devised to promote all kinds of good. A “public corporation” that successfully apes what private corporations do every day, though, seems an extravagant redundancy to this taxpayer.

          • feettothefire

             Please note that in my comment above, the comment you initially replied to, I made no mention at all of CPB. I was addressing contributor “NO NAME’s” characterization of NPR as “government radio.” How you decide to conclude the issue was CPB is a mystery. Go ahead. Take a look. I’ll wait………….All done? As I said, NPR. NPR is a private corporation. It doesn’t matter what you want to call it. It is what it is. As to your claim that the programming on commercial media comes anywhere close to the quality of the programming on NPR or PBS, I’ll simply have to take a pass. Maybe beliefs such as that explains why so many Americans are so dumb. Must be that quality programming like “Big Brother” and “Wipeout.”

          • Greyman

            You continue to characterize NPR as a “private” enterprise, AND IT IS NOT. (It’s not a corporation, either: that distinction goes to CPB, a distinction lost on you.) NPR is a public-private partnership, your mischaracterizations to the contrary. You will learn this clearly over the next few years, as Federal spending for CPB and NPR, APM and PRI, will be reduced significantly, as likely will the levels of corporate sponsorship these public-private entities have enjoyed, so start saving for upcoming pledge drives, which will likely become more numerous and will require more “investment” from devotees.

          • feettothefire

             Please tell me how much power NPR’s “partner,” the federal government, has over any part of it’s operations. Surely the feds must have a degree of input into how their partner operates. Surely Government radio must be required to answer to the government, just as any other government entity is. Surely government radio doesn’t have to stoop to pledge drives for the majority of it’s funds. It’s government radio after all. Since when does the government beg for money?

          • Greyman

            Faithful Wikipedia reports 15 to 20% of NPR’s aggregate revenues are funded from Federal sources through the CPB budget. FY 2012: CPB’s annual budget is pegged at $445.2 million. $69.18 million in direct grants go to public radio stations. $22.85 million is spent on radio program grants. $7 million is set aside for the Radio Program Fund. NPR’s total Federal take thus comes to $99.03 million annually.
            According to Wikipedia.

          • feettothefire

            College students get grants from the government, too. That doesn’t make them partners.

          • feettothefire

             In fact, I just tried Wikipedia myself. According to them, there are over 900 federal grants offered by 26 federal grant-making agencies. Zowie!! that’s sure a lot of public-private parnerships.

          • feettothefire

             This is what George Bush would call “fuzzy Math.” Public radio stations are not NPR. They are private entities that may or may not choose to join the NPR  syndication network. The 69.18 million you cite goes towards the operating budgets of hundreds of independent radio stations. They don’t just sign the checks over to NPR. And the 22.85 million on radio programs also goes to stations around the country. WBUR in Boston is not NPR. WGBH in Boston is not NPR. They pay a fee to receive NPR’s programming and offer their own. Claiming that every penny that goes to public radio stations goes to NPR is nonsense. You may think this is splitting hairs. I think it’s accuracy.

  • Ddag

    Its incredible. If you were fortunate enough to have your own plot of land, and wanted to simply live off the land, farm, maybe a few animals, and to put you life in your own hands, you COULD NOT do it today. Between property taxes and Health Care Tax, freedom and independence are IMPOSSIBLE.

    • TFRX

      Somewhere between Currier & Ives, and Norman Rockwell, the life you’re talking about became vanishingly not an option. The people you’re standing up for don’t exist in any number.

      And when do you think property taxes started, anyway?

      • Dave

        Walk on to the Machine.

  • http://twitter.com/Astraspider Astraspider

    Craig’s phone call epically profound.

  • Ellen Dibble

    The way it works now, under Romneycare in Massachusetts, is that you limp along forking over a large portion of your income to insurers, with whatever condition you can’t afford to get fixed, until you hit 65.  At 65, you can reduce your payments by about a third, by using Medicare, the various three portions.  And till that point, you use any retirement funds you have accumulated to keep yourself afloat as you limp along.  I had had cancer in 1992, which was an excuse, supposedly, for punitive rates, but I was never denied the opportunity to fork over these tens of thousands of dollars.  Because I never had cancer come back, I suppose.  But when the Romneycare kicked in, the rates did not go down; they kept going up at the 8 to 10 percent that had been projected by the insurer back in about 1996.  So.  That was with the Connector and all the options that the state could come up with.  The state got pretty liberal about what they would cover, but it happened not to cover my medical needs.  It was more or less the plight of someone who can’t afford the deductible.  In my case there were a few years of about 10,000 in “deductibles.”  You’d think they’d rather have me healthy than be offering breast reconstruction, but my needs are low profit.  That’s my reading of it.  Anyway, there are always cracks to fall through.  But when the system squeezes millions into hobbling around for decades, which I suspect it does, that’s not good.  I survived it.  I’m 65.  But it’s true that the poor will turn up at hospitals and the hospitals will be paid, and the nurses won’t have to turn the poor away.  The people who don’t show up are the ones who actually have coverage, but can’t afford, on top of the coverage, the thousand bucks to be seen at the ER (for example).  They’ve already spent that medical part of their budget on the insurance.

    • Worried for the country(MA)

      One of the major reasons insurance is so expensive in MA is that the state limits competition. They define the minimum level of coverage at a very high level.

      • jefe68

        They define the minimum level of coverage at a very high level

        So according to you the way to cut insurance costs is to have the lowest type of minimum coverage. Which also means a high deductible and is in most cases the worst kind of health insurance people can have.

        Are you aware how absurd this is? By the way health care costs in MA have been leveling off.
        The only reason premiums do not rise even more is due to the states regulations. You really do not have a clue do you.

    • Pagassae

      I empathize with your plight. Single payer is really the way to go. And I strongly believe that FOR PROFIT health care should be both morally and legally WRONG.

    • Ellen Dibble

      I’m thinking I should add, about the deductibles.  The options I was offered were demonic.  My insurer could have noted that when I was fully covered, I would get about $2,500 of care a year, for a few years.  Thus they would offer two plans, one plan had a $2,500 deductible, and the other was exactly $2,500 higher than the cheaper plan.  Now, I was building a home business, and this was not one of those where there is a 90 percent chance of failure.  It had to work; I had to pay what it took to make it work.  I needed resources to keep from, basically, killing myself or going a little berserk.  I wasn’t okay (heavy metal toxicity, immune dysfunction involving that).  So I had a choice, go for the cheaper insurance and forgo the care I had been using?  Or buy the full coverage.  I know how stingy I am, and I knew that with the deductible, I would more or less let myself rot for that year.  So I paid the extra.  
      But there is also the issue of time and energy; doctors who don’t have a clear way of treating things can send you on a lot of wild goose chases, covered or not, and without a car, this is prohibitive.  I can imagine this affecting a lot of people.  You could be run ragged getting your bones scanned for calcium, one thing after another, each another day out of your life, relating to nothing that you are plagued with, but something enough Americans suffer from that insurance is glad to cover it.  Doctors with enough confidence will tell you without a firm alliance with you, they are wasting your time, and respect that you lived in your body for X number of years, and maybe you actually know best about certain things.  It’s cheaper for the system that way.  More care is not better care; it’s just that certain care has been something doctors are apparently given bonuses for.  “Hey, you pay a lot for insurance; take everything they offer.”

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    The government is given the authority to tax, but it won’t use it?  Right.  What I see here in healthcare refrom is increased costs and little added benefit.

    • feettothefire

       Little added benefit, except to forty million uninsured folks, diabetics and others with pre-existing conditions, and young adults who can’t afford healthcare.

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

        Not that I’ve seen yet.  You expect me to take that on faith?  That may have been the goal, but I’ll wait to see what happens in fact.

        • feettothefire

           What am I taking on faith? The pre-existing condition element of the legislation? I’m not taking that on faith. IT’S IN THE LAW. No “taking it on faith” required. Coverage for young adults? Nope,that’s in the law also. Are you claiming that insurance companies might  ignore the law and refuse to do these things. That’s the only way what you just wrote could make any sense.

        • jimino

          Your repeated admissions of ignorance makes me doubt you are really a college professor.  Of course, others here may see it as proof you are.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

            So because I express my doubts about the predicted panacea, you call that an admission of ignorance and deny my statement as to what I do for a living? I see. You only want college professors to act as cheerleaders for your own causes. Fortunately, we still have academic freedom.

    • Azra

      Obviously, you haven’t looked.

  • Bethrjacobs

    I am over 200% of poverty line must pay 2-3% of income in
    fine or 8.5% for premiums based on about 22k I cannot
    afford to use and I suspect any misrepresentati0n or mistake in preexisting
    conditi9on will be tax fraud

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

      Yes.  If you’re poor, you have the Democrats.  If you’re rich, you have the Republicans.  But what party represents the middle class or the people who work to survive, but only just make it?

      • Azra

        Democrats, of course. We’re the ones this is all for. I’m not wealthy, by any stretch of the imagination, but not below the poverty line. People like Republican politicians, (if most of them didn’t get theirs FREE), will never have to worry about not being able to have health insurance. It’s the rest of us who need the help, and we’re finally getting it.

        • Brandstad

          How much of your freedom are you willing to give up to get a government managed outcome?

          • TFRX

            Freedom? You’re already working with a death panel; you just won’t admit it. Call the 800 number on that card in your wallet to see how much “management” and “freedom” will get you, chump.

            Or it’s just another amazing coincidence of how all the libertarian-conservative sorts here  have perfect healthcare that’s never been fucked up by a bean-counter’s decision?

            Where do I buy some of that stuff? It can’t be mere chance that so many others have such wonderful health insurance.

      • jimino

        The Congressional Progressive Caucus is your only advocate in D.C. if you’re middle class.

  • Worried for the country(MA)

    The problem with Robert’s decision is to justify his ruling he had to REWRITE the law.  How is that possible?
     

    • feettothefire

       Roberts didn’t rewrite a single word of the law. Saying he did means nothing.

      • Worried for the country(MA)

         He did by claiming that the mandate was a tax — instead of a penalty.  His reasoning defies all logic.

        • Conner44

          It would suggest that Obama was lying, that couldn’t be.  Right?

        • J__o__h__n

          He said Congress had the power to issue a penalty under the power to tax, he didn’t rewrite the law as a tax. 

          • Dave

            A penalty for not buying something. That is flat out unconstitutional and wrong from a basic humanitarian liberty perspective.

          • feettothefire

             Please let Mitt Romney know. I must pay a penalty on my state income tax every year if I don’t purchase healthcare coverage. This is because of the healthcare bill he championed while he was my governor. It was a government MANDATE.

          • Brandstad

            I agree that the law is bad, but being penalized for not bying something doesn’t seem unreasonable if you think about car insurance.  If you own and drive a car, you can be penalized for not having insurance.  Althought you are not penalized for not having insurance if you don’t have a car…

          • Azra

            . . . and you’re not penalized for not having health insurance
            if you don’t have a body.

        • feettothefire

           It really doesn’t matter how many times you say it.

          • Worried for the country(MA)

             What is the limiting power of the government?

            Can the government now penalize me for not purchasing a gun (or any other product) under the taxing power in the constitution?

          • feettothefire

             No. There’s no law forcing you to purchase a gun. However, there is a law in Arizona forcing you to show your papers. Republicans and conservatives just adore giving the government THAT power. But, unless your skin has a brownish hue, I’m sure you’ll have no problem should you choose to visit that lovely state.

          • Iamnotageneral

            How about if you don’t show your papers, you get taxed? 

          • feettothefire

             You get thrown in jail. “Welcome to the sunny state of Arizona. We hope you enjoy you stay.”

          • Iamnotageneral

            Sounds fair, but I’d prefer the revenues.

          • Azrastarr

            Sure you would.

          • Worried for the country(MA)

             Mmmm.  Your response is a tad ‘off point’.

            So you agree Roberts removed a major limiting principle in the constitution?

            You appear to only want the government to force people to purchase things that YOU decide are good for society.

            IMHO both parties are to blame for our immigration problems.  There are solutions but they would require honest measures — including removal of all magnets.

          • feettothefire

             My response isn’t off point. You asked if the Government could now penalize you for not purchasing a gun. I told you they couldn’t.                   I believe Roberts did what Supreme Court Justices do. He didn’t remove anything from the constitution. He made a decision. A judgement. A judgement not unlike the courts decision in Arizona. Much of the Arizona law was struck down, but the “freedom to harass Hispanics” part was upheld. Some people like that. Some people don’t. Some people hate Robert’s reasoning here. Some Don’t. Tough in Arizona. Tough here.

          • Worried for the country(MA)

             Also, do I believe Roberts or Obama (and all the Senators like Ben Nelson,  Claire McCaskill, etc) who said they wouldn’t vote for the bill if it was a tax?

          • Brandstad

            It does because our constitution lays out what kind of taxes can be levied and if the law was a tax law the Supreme Court couldn’t hear the case until the tax went into effect, which it hasn’t. 

            Roberts acknowledged this and said the Tax wasn’t really a Tax but for this it was a Penalty. 

            So to sum it up the penalty is a Tax when it needs to be to be constitutional and the Tax is a penalty when it needs to be so the Supreme Court can rule on it!

          • feettothefire

             Maybe you should send the Supreme court an e-mail or a tweet telling them what they did wrong, those stupid Supreme Court Justices. I’m sure they’d revisit their decision.

      • Azra

        It means that they’ve been brainwashed, and won’t let those pesky facts get in the way of what they would rather believe.

    • Pagassae

      Delusional and flat wrong…again.

    • Iamanotageneral

      True dat.

    • Brandstad

      He also had to argue that it was a TAX while arguing it wasn’t a TAX because if it was a tax they couldn’t hear the case until the tax went into effect!

  • Scott B, Jamestown NY

    The people complaining about Obamacare can’t stop saying “You lie” in their heads when  anyone tries to explain the actual facts of the law, and not what they want to hear.You can’t listen to anyone if you’re talking (even if it’s in your head( at the same time.

    The naysayers of Obamacare keep throwing up these  potshots for things that don’t exist in the law, like it’s socialized medicine, or that the govt can’t tell you what medical coverage or doctor you can have. They can’t see the forest for the
    trees of their bias.

    It’s only a tax IF they don’t have insurance, as a penalty. Low and Middle income people aren’t having a new tax line item to find on their pay stub.

     
     

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

      O.K., so what about low income workers with preexisting conditions?  What good does this reform do for them?

      • jimino

        They will be able to purchase insurance through exchanges, regardless of their existing conditions,  and have their premiums subsidized.  What more do you want?

        • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

           Single payer or at least a public option.  That’s the more that I want.

          • Azra

            That’s what most of us want, but Republicans made it impossible. We’re very lucky to have ANY health care reform, and if Republicans had their way, we would still be back where we were.

            In November, when we get rid of the Republicans, we can finally have single payer, and the President will be free to keep even more of his 2008 campaign promises. With that ball and chain out of the way, he will be able to make America much better, and much stronger.

          • Azra

            Sorry, meant “public option”, not single payer.

  • Worried for the country(MA)

    Katrina loves illegals.  Why have borders and laws?

    • Dave

      That’s the goal. Utopia 101. As if an individuals efforts and choices to provide and build, are invalid, and that everyone else who makes poor decisions or won’t work, should be able to have the fruits of the labor.

      Or people who haven’t struggled to create and maintain a Rule of Law society can just have its benefits and we can all live as one because it sounds good.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001436729213 Wes Nickerson

    The poor are not the “other.” They are us. The great middle class of the United States is becoming poor. The poor are a growing class of people, while the middle class is shrinking. Nearly 50% of the people in this country are poor already. Many more are at risk of slipping into poverty. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are addressing the roots of this problem. We need a Green New Deal to put America back to work again, to revive the American middle class.

    http://www.jillstein.org/
     

    • Azra

      The jobs bill will be a good start; putting people back to work rebuilding our crumbling bridges, buildings, roads, tracks, and everything else. Naturally, Republicans are against it.

      • Brandstad

        Why didn’t Obama give us a jobs bill in the 1st two years of his presidency when his party had control of all braches of government? 
         
        I am left to think that Jobs were not that important to Obama…
         

        • TFRX

          You and your WATBs were too busy throwing a tantrum in Congress.

          And if you want to join the real world by, say, talking to working class folks about the intersection of jobs and healthcare, hey: There’s a first time for everything.

        • Azra

          Because you weren’t paying attention. For America’s sake, it’s a good thing that the rest of us were.

  • MrNutso

    What are papers?  And how do you do this without asking everyone in sight to prove your are legally allowed to be in the country.

    • Brandstad

      A valad photo ID proves your identity and legal status!  Are you really that out of touch to not know this?

      • Azra

        They can’t be forged?

        • Brandstad

          What exactly are you talking about?

          A valad photo ID proves your identity and legal status!

          If someone forged the ID then it is the cops and our legal system to catch them and prosecute them.

  • Jack Acme

    Caller Jerry is way off base. I doubt most Arizona Police speak Spanish. More to the point, plenty of people living here illegally have a driver license, car registration, and insurance.  

  • Iamanotageneral

    You want to vote, show us your papers.

    You want a drivers license, show us your papers.

    You want your property tax bill, show us your papers.

    You want to have a block party, show us your papers.

    • Pagassae

      What nonsense.

  • Ellen Dibble

    The Republicans in high dudgeon in the House — it’s unbecoming.  Who is behind this?  The NRA? If Beatty is right, that the fear of gun owners of America was this was a way to promote gun control, then it would have had to have been part of the plan for one of the guns to get used against one of the American border guards. Right? By the way, if some federal agent’s name get leaked, then people of the opposing party would be all over whoever forgets to white out that name within the 7600 pages of subpoenaed documents, or 7600 pages so far. People go to jail for leaking, right?

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

      You ever talk to gun control advocates?  I have, and as a result, I can’t trust anything that they say.

      • Pagassae

        The NRA is a criminal operation.

        • Brandstad

          What exactly is the crime?

          • Azra

            Strong-arming Congress into doing the wrong thing.

        • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

           Really?  What specific laws has the NRA violated?

      • Azra

        Sounds like they’re Republican.

  • Iamanotageneral

    Obama and Holder are hiding something bad, guaranteed.

    My guess is they’ll show us the papers after the election.

    • Pagassae

      In your first sentence you say:  “guranteed”…as is you know something special the rest of us jerks do not.

      In your second sentence you “guess”.  In reality you really do not know anything.

    • Azra

      We do know that it will be before Romney shows us his income tax returns for the last ten years.

      • Brandstad

        Romney’s tax returns are not going to show us how 2000 AK47′s were given to criminals who used them to kill at least 300 individuals and Why they did so! 

        If the government intended to track the guns, why were only 3 of the guns fitted with a GPS tracking device?

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    The Executive Branch gets too impressed with its power, and Congress threatens a contempt vote.  It doesn’t matter which party is in at the moment, so long as the government is divided.

    • Dave

      Now that Roberts has fused Judicial and Legislative, to support the Executive, we are running out of checks and balances.

      But don’t worry, its for our own good!

      • Iamanotageneral

        Don’t try to drown your sorrows in a 32oz Mountain Dew!

        • Ray in VT

          I say go ahead and go for the 2 liter bottle.

          • Dave

            But I fear the fine…. fee… tax… ?

            Help me Judge Roberts!

          • Iamnotageneral

            That help will cost you!

          • Ray in VT

            Advice, like lunch, isn’t free.

          • Ray in VT

            I’ll just pay my 5 cents deposit and be on my way.

  • Greyman

    In terms of “accuracy in advertising”, “On Point’s” guest listing could accurately show (instead of underplaying to the point of concealing) Katrina vanden Heuvel’s status as board member of the Institute for Policy Studies, home for Ivy League leftists who can assure us all of the paternal (maternal?) care that statism and utopian economics can foster.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Jack Beatty, the Gun Owners of America are not any more extreme in support of their constitutional rights than any other interest group.  And yes, look at what was attempted after Dumb and Spurious:  a registration of long guns bought in border states.

    • jimino

      Greg Camp, as an avid proponent of unfettered gun rights by all, tell me why distributing MORE guns, as was apparently done in this program, isn’t a good thing?  Are you claiming that some people should not have the right to as many guns of whatever type their hearts desire?

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         1.  Mexican citizens are barred from having most kinds of guns, despite there being a firearms right named in the Mexican constitution.  The U.S. government ships lots of guns to the Mexican government, and those guns are frequently “mislaid.”  I object to arming a government as corrupt as the one to the south when the citizens can’t be legally armed.

        2.  I see no reason to go out of our way to arm drug gangs.  That’s what Dumb and Spurious accomplished.

        3.  I also see no reason to give up American gun rights because the president of Mexico says pretty please.

  • Zero

    Here are the republicans: “Government is the problem…just elect us and we’ll prove it.” 

    • Bruce

      Exactly right…how succinct and irrefutable.  Thanks for reminding us of this kernel of truth.

  • Worried for the country(MA)

    I thought Jack was for government transparency.   I guess he only wants transparency when a Republican is in office.

    • Dave

      His predictable DNC talking point role has overshadowed his quirky independent-minded progressive image. It’s old and more transparent than anything in government.

      • Worried for the country(MA)

         Well stated.

  • Bruce

    Let’s see…am I missing something?  Eric Holder held in contempt by a House of Rep. that the vast majority of Americans hold in contempt. Congress’ approval rating only slightly higher than that of the Taliban.  I’d say to Eric Holder: CONGRATULATIONS AND ENJOY YOUR WEEKEND!

    • Pagassae

      Exactly. I regard the Congress as just short of a criminal operation.

    • Iamanotageneral

      Most of that approval rating is due to Democrats, they are despised, especially the commies in the Senate.

      • Ray in VT

        That is pretty funny.  So the approval rating is lower now than ever because of the minority party in the House.  Interesting logic.

        I also see commie being thrown around a lot here today.  Did I accidentally travel back in time to the days of the Cold War?

      • jimino

         Name two.

      • Azra

        Name one.

  • Dave

    Bottom line:

    Corporatists and their Democratic and Republican lackeys won.

    Government/Corporate fusion is not the answer, it’s modern day tyranny.

    Constitutionalists and Liberty types are the only ones making the principled case against this, and why, anymore.

    Entitlement Dems and Crony Republicans who pander to our Utopian and Authoritarian, naive and dark sides, have got us where they want us, delivering us like sheep to the slaughter.

    • J__o__h__n

      I don’t usually defend them, but why are you blaming the Republicans for Obamacare?  Roberts is the only Republican justice who ruled in favor of it.  Even though it was originally a Republican idea, they didn’t vote for it.  Even Romney is currently opposed to it (as of 3:15 pm June 29, 2012).  Once again the facts don’t fit your narrative.

  • Adks12020

    the representative from South Carolina is ridiculous.  He is incapable of talking.  He simply yells.  I have a tip for him….microphones amplify the sound..no need to yell.

    • Azra

      Thank you. On NPR, I heard that startlingly out-of-control man, but didn’t catch his name. Not long after that, I heard an equally bizarre female. Couldn’t make out what either one was screaming, but I presumed that they were having a bad day. By their abnormal behavior, I knew that they were Republicans, just didn’t have the names. Do you know the name of that strange woman who was having a public nervous breakdown?

  • Guest

    January 21, 2009:  “For a long time now there’s been too much secrecy in this city.  Transparency and rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.  Starting today, every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known.”  –President Barack Obama
     

    June 20, 2012:  President Barack Obama invokes executive privilege to shield Justice Department documents from disclosure.
     

    The simplest way to resolve the issue is to disclose the documents.

    • Dave

      But….but….

    • Greyman

      Seventeen Democrats’ votes to cite Holder with civil and
      criminal contempt qualifies the citation as bi-partisan . . . quite unlike,
      say, passage of PPACTA.

    • TFRX

      I know a witchhunt when I see one.

      And the scuttlebutt is that AG Holder is catching flack for not getting all vote-scrubby like some governors want.

      • Guest

        Synonyms for ‘scuttlebutt’ are gossip and rumor.  I put as much faith in the “vote-scrubby” scuttlebutt as I do the theory that Fast and Furious at its onset was a plan to flood the area with AK-47s and deaths as an excuse to implement gun control laws.

        • TFRX

          That post says more about you and your unbalanced media diet than it does about reality.

          • Guest

            As does yours.

    • jimino

      So you’re not one of those criticizing the release of information about STUXNET or other cyber attacks on Iran, or the so-called kill list for drones, or details of the plan to get Bin Laden, right?  You would advocate transparency, and not that they are state secrets, right?

      • Guest

        It hurts when the president’s own words come back to bite him, doesn’t it?  The difference between the Executive Branch leaks and the Fast and Furious documents is that the former are classified documents and the latter is not.

        • jimino

          So if some bureaucrat classified them, which happens all the time, you would be satisfied?

          • Guest

            So, since the documents are unclassifed, you agree that President Obama should honor the promise he made in his inaugural speech “that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known” ?

          • Azra

            Unless releasing them will result in even more death.

  • William

    Clearly you are rude and need to step away from the keyboard. I care little for your barnyard legal ideas.

    • Pagassae

      Why do you keep posting to youself?  You are drunk, insane or both.

      • Steve_T

         It’s just our old fiend using a new handle.

        • Ray in VT

          One handle for each voice in his head perhaps?

          • Steve_T

             Exactly!

  • William

    Who are you? What are you afraid of? Someone asks a few questions and you get very concerned? Working for Obama?

  • William

    The courts have settled this matter and to see the Demcrats trying to defy the courts is of grave concern.

    • Azra

      The Courts have indeed settled the matter, and to see the Republicans trying to take away our health care is of very grave concern.

  • William

    This is not Chicago and the rule of law is more important than allowing illegals to vote.

  • William

    Respect for the courts and the law is all that matters.

  • William

    You forgot the ones that are owned by the radical left.

  • William

    So Fast and Furious is just a “drive by” program that got a few people killed but hey, what the heck, it’s the government let it go.

    • Azra

      Kinda like the Iraq war.

      • JGC

        This is just a general comment about the William postings.  Whenever I see just one “like” posted, I have to wonder, is it a self-like, if you know what I mean?

        And is there an etiquette to self-liking?  To me it seems somehow weird, maybe even perverted…And is there a word for self-liking? Me-sturbation, maybe?  All of William’s postings have one “like”, so either he has one big superfan, or maybe he is a me-sturbator….

        • Azra

          Think you’ve got something there, and it’s not likely that he has any fans.

  • William

    Step away from the keyboard.

  • William

    The Congress has to be respected by the AG and he needs to understand that very quickly.

    • Roy Mac

      Well, there you go:  he who holds the chalk owns the chalk board!

  • Still Here

    The criminal Obama administration needs to be locked up, all of them!  They are an ugly blemish on the great United States of America.  Happy 4th everyone!

    • Pagassae

      Then we can find Bush and the ENTIRE Republican party and launch them all into space and towards the SUN.

      • Still Here

        Complete nonsense, but your usual.

        • Ray in VT

          As though your original comment is a great example of sound and rational reasoning.

          • Still Here

            Thank you.

          • Ray in VT

            You’re welcome?

    • JGC

      Happy 4th! And Happy 4th to the Supreme Court Justices! Have a great summer, we’ll see you in October! Enjoy your freedoms!

    • Azra

      Thank you. It’s difficult not to be happy now; we’re still smiling, after twenty-four hours.

    • Zero

      Somebody got his panties in a wad over the recent decision. 

  • Brandstad

    The Supreme Court ruled Obamacare to be the largest tax increase in the history of the world!  Seriously.  It also taxes the middle class after Obama promised to not do so.

    • Azra

      Nobody’s being forced to pay the fee/tax/penalty/fine/ ? .

      • Brandstad

        If you buy a tooth brush, you pay a new Tax!  Not to mention the rest of the long list!

        • Roy Mac

          Aha!  The always-effective toothbrush-broccoli gambit–check & mate!

        • Azra

          You sure do, as in most other parts of the world.

        • Azra

          What’s your point?

          • Brandstad

            Obama raised taxes on everyone especially the middle class that he promised not to.

        • Azra

          What’s your point? (I’m not buying a toothbrush.)

          Have you been inhaling again?

    • Zero
      • Brandstad

        I am sorry; it is roughly the 3rd when ranked by % of GDP and not real Dollars.  This doesn’t change the fact that it is a huge tax increase on All Americans regardless of their income. 
         
        Didn’t Obama promise no new taxes on the middle class?  You might want to fact check that too!
         

        • Zero

          I actually agree.  I much prefer heavier taxes on the top with a public option than the mandate.  Who doesn’t?

          But you need to stop calling Obama a radical lefty since he took the right wing solution to Hilliarycare.  Hopefully, America would move to a single payer. 

        • Zero

          And it’s not at tax on “All” Americans.  It is if you can afford health care but choose not to buy.  There is an expansion of Medicaid.  And you should also consider that if you can afford health care, the likelihood that you will need to buy it on your own is slim since you would have a job where the employer would be fined pretty heavily for not providing health care. 

        • ulTRAX

           So does that mean you’ll NEVER again repeat that false claim? Didn’t think so. And why aren’t you asking yourself why Rush feels the need to LIE to his audience? The answer is obvious… it’s because he abuses the listener’s trust and hopes to manipulate them. How goddamn noble!

        • Azra

          Where do you come up with this taxing nonsense? Please be specific when citing your factcheck sources. I’d like to see your facts too. Thanks.

          

      • Azra

        No. He doesn’t hate them. He ignores them.

    • Pagassae

      Drivel.

    • Iamnotageneral

      True dat.

  • JGC

    “PNC Bank Corp. has reached a $90-million settlement in a class-action lawsuit over excessive overdraft fees…JP Morgan, Chase, Bank of America, TD Bank and others have reached similar agreements. The lawsuit claims banks improperly processed debit card transactions to maximize the overdraft fees customers paid.  The PNC settlement says the Pittsburgh-based bank is not admitting liability…”

    • Ray in VT

      And now I await the comments that say that we can’t fine banks any of their activities, even if blatantly illegal, lest they pass those fines along to their customers.

      • JGC

        One thing I belatedly am finding of interest:  I am a customer of TD Bank in Canada. But there were never any shenanigans with stacking debit card transactions to generate overdraft fees in their favor, here in Canada.  

        Is that part of the difference between the U.S. banking system and the Canadian one at the moment? Are the Canadian laws structured to better protect the consumer and the overall banking system, compared to the U.S. laws? 

        Because TD Bank is a huge bank in Canada, but as far as I know has never been snagged in any Dimon-sized $9-billion losses, or has ever been the subject of a Canadian bail-out. But they are wading into the waters of U.S. banking, and apparently their Canadian culture goes by the wayside in pursuit of all “legal” U.S. profits.

  • jack9146

    I am not a constitutional attorney, nor an attorney of any kind. Therefore, I have nothing to say about the decision from a legal perspective.  However, I have two comments:  1.  As the CEO of a medical device company, I absolutely guarantee you that I will raise my prices by 3.627%, which will allow me to regain the lost profit due to the 3.5% excise tax that ObamaCare levies on the medical device industry.  I assume most to all of my colleagues will do the same.  We work for our shareholders, and this is our job.  2-The money to pay for this bill must come from somewhere.  Therefore, in addition to the taxes built into the bill, and cuts in Medicare, there will -as sure as rains come in the spring- be more taxes.  I would not mind at all, provided I could believe that the federal government would use my tax dollars to improve the lives of people with fewer economic resources than me:  health care ought to be an equal right of all.  But from my personal experiences with two federal agencies, I have lost all faith in the government’s ability to do so.  Rather, I believe that the government’s main goal is self perpetuation of its bureaucracy and its powers.

    • Iamnotageneral

      True dat.

    • http://www.richardsnotes.org Richard

      Your job is also to sell devices. Medicare buys devices (all other things being equal) from the lowest bidder. If you took yourself out of that game your shareholders might not like that.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BFQVQQBOBBKLBTILJSHLVSNOJE SIX

      Jack9146, Bravo! 

    • Still Here

      Perhaps you could save some money by moving manufacturing and other activities to China?

      • Pagassae

        As your corporate pals do?

        • Still Here

          They are being driven away by taxes to support freebies for the lazy and stupid.  Your solution would be that the government should make medical devices no doubt.  No wonder our country is in decline. 

          • Pagassae

            Yes I know….  Thanks for the standard Republican party line of LIES. The Nation is in decline because of criminal Republican bankers,  CEOs and the corrupt criminals in Congress which they own completely. I still say that you are an alien, because your mind does not work as a normal human’s brain does. As Judge Judy would say: “There is something wrong with you!”

          • Still Here

            Please, stick to Judge Judy, your brain is mush.

          • Pagassae

            Oh how cutting….  LOL

          • Ray in VT

            Hmmm, I wonder what could have Obama detractors here so worked up today?

          • Azra

            I wonder . . . they seem so grumpy these days.

    • Pagassae

      Thanks for a rational, and honest, observation. The politicians are so full of LIES, that the average person does not know who to believe, and hence believes none of them.

      I do think that Obama, with all of his faults, is as genuine as a pol can be. On the other hand I think that Romney is a liar of the first magnitude.

      • Still Here

        You are a sheep.  You will go where your master directs you.

        • Ray in VT

          Just like the knuckledragging fools on the right?

        • Pagassae

          Baaaah….  Unless it is towards Republican lies. Then I will turn around and show ya’ll my woolie behind.

        • Zero

          You are of the movement that deifies the top as the Creator of Jobs.  Whatever, I’ve heard Romney say that he is “running to save the soul of America.”  Go follow the light.

      • jack9146

        The problem as I see it is with Congress:  The 535 members of the House and Senate are more interested in reelection than any other thing.  The cost of elections is so high that the army of lobbyists on both the left and right have corrupted the system beyond repair.  We need a Constitutional amendment to enforce term limits:  Two six-year terms for senators and three terms for members of the House, but for four years.  We can stagger the cycle so that there are always experienced people in both houses.  We need to ban their working for any lobbying group for ten full years after they leave office.  This will get government working again for the people.  As to Romney v. Obama, both men to me are not qualified.  I generally vote Republican, as they fall on the side of less government, which is in line with what I feel about its corrupt condition.  But the Republicans seem capable of only articulating what they are against and not what they favor in the way of alternatives.  This only adds to my disgust.  

    • jefe68

      If, as you state that health care should be a right for all, what do you think we as a nation should do?
      If other nations, such as Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Taiwan can do this how is that we can’t?

      Relying on the private sector to do this is absurd as you stated they are legally bound to the shareholders.
      Which would be a conflict of interest in a not for profit health care system.
        

      • jack9146

        First:  I am no expert, but let me try.  I would as in the French system, allow the doctors to make all the treatment decisions, so as to eliminate insurance oversight.  I would allow interstate competition by allowing the public to buy insurance from any licensed provider across state lines.  I would pay incentives for preventive medicine (I have a colleague whose device will never go to market because insurance will not reimburse for something that prevents a disease, but only after the person is sick).  I would limit pain and suffering awards to lower malpractice insurance rates and the added expense of over-testing that doctors use to cover themselves.  In short, I would use a combination of the private and public sector and also tread on some powerful lobbying groups: trial lawyers, insurance companies, and the FDA.

    • Zero

      This is why for-profit health industry is absurd.  When crutches cost $600 from a Hospital, the industry is broke.  Do you peoples see how this guy is bending you over?  He’s absolutely right–health care is always going to be expensive unless we get control of the equipment costs.  And their our two ways of doing it: government makes the equipment and it would be illegal for government to make more money than the cost of production.  Or, we can raise this guy’s individual taxes and appropriate the funds to public hospitals to pay for his equipment.  I prefer the former. 

      Do you people see it now…how the 1% is bending you over?  He says he cares, but you are going to get bent over anyway, and then he puts his smiling douche-bag picture up.  God forbid, he and the rest of the executive staff take home a smaller pay check to prevent the cost from going up.  Gotta make a million even if it screws the middle class. 

  • JGC

    Here is a bit of good news for Rush Limbaugh, after his recent disappointment with the Supreme Court decision: Oxycontin is set to go off patent next year, and cheaper generic formulations will be manufactured by companies such as Watson Pharmaceuticals and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries.

    When he instructs his Hispanic housekeeper to go purchase his Hillbilly Heroin, he will now be able to enjoy his pharmaceutical high at a lower price per dose. 

    • JGC

      This may also help him with his donut hole problem, which under the Affordable Care Act will not be fully closed until 2020. Less money into the donut hole, more money for donuts.

  • TomK in Boston

    1. Etchasketch says he never raised taxes in MA.

    2. Etasketch introduced the “individual mandate” in his MA Romneycare.

    3, Now that the Extreme Court says the mandate is allowed as a tax, Etcha says it is a “massive” tax increase on the middle class.

    So, if Etcha was a normal human being, he would have to confess to having forced a “massive” tax increase on the citizens of MA. Good thing that logic doesn’t apply to the Supreme Liar and Chameleon, otherwise he might spontaneously combust.

    • feettothefire

       I’m still waiting for at least one conservative thinker here to explain Romney’s thinking on this(I use the word thinking lightly here.)  I’ve asked them. No dice yet, unless I missed it further down the line. I’ll look again.

      • Azra

        Even Romney doesn’t know those answers.

    • LS

      In his response speech, Mitt “Romneycare” Romney promised that if HE were POTUS he would make sure insurance companies wouldn’t reject people for pre-existing conditions, every American would have access to affordable healthcare, and that people would be able keep their current insurance… LOL, sounds a little bit like the ACA, doesn’t it?!

      • Pagassae

        Romney is full of lies about what he would do. Fact is that even if he were elected (God forbid) he is NOT King. His transparent lies are so beyond reality I am always amazed that anyone takes him seriously. But there are plenty of fools who do, sadly.

      • Azra

        . . . and a lot like Romneycare.

    • Guest

      Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution:  “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
       

      The Tenth Amendment was written to emphasize the limited nature of the powers delegated to the federal government. As James Madison stated, “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined.  Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite.”
       

      There are many, many laws enacted by states that would be unconstitutional if enacted by the federal government.  Just because Massachusetts funded its individual mandate with a penalty, it did not make it legal for the federal government to do the same.  The arguments of President Obama and the Democrats that the individual mandate was a penalty and not a tax is true for Massachusetts; however the Supreme Court acknowledged that the federal government could not enact the same penalty for its individual mandate, and declared the federal individual mandate is a tax.  Thus the healthcare law in Massachusetts is funded by a penalty, and the federal healthcare law is funded by a tax.

      • ulTRAX

        Let’s get some perspective here. One of Madison’s FIRST acts in the
        FIRST CONGRESS was to propose funding for lighthouses and hospitals for
        disabled seamen. Pray tell, where in the Constitution is there any
        specific authorization for EITHER?

         
        But the powers of Congress under Article 1, sec 8 to tax to provide for the general welfare are NOT restricted except if what Congress decides violates some other part of the Constitution. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

        And because there’s a Supremacy Clause… This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. the Fed’s actions trump the Tenth. 

        • ulTRAX

          I wrote: “the Fed’s actions trump the Tenth.”… Slight correction: typically in the US the federal government offers states a choice… federal money… but the state must accept federal conditions. 

      • Dave

        That’s so……1700′s. Who cares? Why do we need limited government? Why do we need separation of powers? Why do we need a Constitution? What is the “Rule of Law” crap? Discretion by smart men is the way to go!

        Tyranny? That’ll never happen again, c’mon, we’re all set now!

      • jefe68

        Interesting, however the Federal government did overturn state Jim Crow laws and segregation.

        Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), the Supreme Court case in which the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students unconstitutional.

        There are more cases and rulings that override this argument about states rights being numerous and indefinite. In this case your reading of Madison is wrongly placed.
        One wonders on which side of this argument James Madison would have come down on.
        My guess is the for the general good of the nation as whole. Health care is for the good of the entire nation. Which is why single payer is the only way to go.

      • TomK in Boston

        Ha ha ha. Your  doubletalk about taxes vs penalties may impress in a classroom, but not in the real world.  If Etcha now claims that the mandate, which he called a “personal responsibility incentive” when he introduced it in MA, is a “massive tax increase” in the USA, then, sorry. he’s admitting to having massively raised taxes MA. Y’know, if it walks like a duck…..That is true regardless of the powers of the states vs the feds.

        You guys are in a fantasy world about the Constitution. The Founders tried “sovereign states” with the Articles, saw that it was a disaster, and put the Constitution in place so we cd function like a real nation, with the commerce clause and the “mandate” to “promote the general welfare”. Washington and Madison would be amazed that anyone questioned Etacha’s mandate.

        • feettothefire

           Please be kind to Mr. Guest. He finally admitted to me in a comment above that he believes government does have a right to impose healthcare mandates on its citizens. He’s the only brave contributing conservative here to take such a courageous stance so far. Kudos to him.

  • LS

    Be careful of the backlash that has already begun… Romney (you may know him from “RomneyCare”) immediately responded with lies and distortions. The ACA will only raise taxes slightly on the super-rich- those so wealthy they won’t notice a dent in their income (while this allows the poor and desperate to actually have health insurance, period). The other taxes will be on manufacturers of some medical devices such as indoor tanning machines. The penalty for being uninsured, which Roberts deemed constitutional as a “tax”, was not intended as a take hike by the President, but was intended to reduce free riders who do not get health insurance, use our hospitals anyway, and cause the rest of us to pay about $1000 extra per year in health insurance to cover them. Know the facts, not the sound bytes.

    • Pagassae

      I agree with you, but most under informed Americans respond to the sound bite, and are unable to think beyond that.

  • Kivenaberham

    we as a country spend a trillion on defense. meaning we drop bombs around the world via unman drone in defense of democracy. and in all the democratic countries in this world where the western value is uphold by its citizen, the conservative in this country arguments our citizenship is meaningless if you are poor. especially if you are consider as equal to others. the 1 trillion dollar we spend on taxes on defense is to take care of citizens who volunteer to live in a totalitarian system aka the military industrial complex but the civilian who are too poor to pay for health care should just die, is that right? should the “christian” conservative arguments defend the right to commit suicidal as a means to end the suffering as well? may be its time to let the conservative allow being poor as a way to defend their value in America. lets face it most conservative value is build upon hate. hate as a pretext for being aggressive in domestic policy against the working class citizen. hate as a motivation to American workers with low wages, no benefit, and harder conditions. hate as a pretext to define themselves against their opponents.  after all conservative pride itself as a party that has real American value!
     

  • Dave

    Michael J. Burry: Failed Ideologues are Writing Reality out of the History of the Economic Crisishttp://www.capitalismwithoutfailure.com/2012/06/michael-j-burry-failed-ideologues-are.html

  • Dave

    Michael J. Burry: Failed Ideologues are Writing Reality out of the History of the Economic Crisis

    http://www.capitalismwithoutfailure.com/2012/06/michael-j-burry-failed-ideologues-are.html

    • Dave

      “In 2010, Burry wrote an op-ed in the New York Times (text following video) entitled, I Saw the Crisis Coming. Why Didn’t the Fed? No member of government ever reached out to Burry to discuss the issue – to see if there was any way to bring his focused wisdom and uncompromised analysis to a government that was tragically deficient. Instead, within 2 weeks of the publication of the op-ed, all 6 of his defunct funds were audited. Soon thereafter, the FBI initiated an investigation into his activities.

      Greenspan’s prodigies are beyond compromised. That the IRS and the FBI were sent to create havoc for Burry is a form of abuse of process. Our democracy is failing us. Checks and balances have been subverted by money, people in leadership positions protecting their failed legacies, and absolute impunity for the power elite who are successfully marginalizing the truth-tellers. As Burry notes, they are rewriting history.”

  • Brandstad

    Obamacare cuts Medicare funding by $500,000,000!

    How is this good for the poor or middle class!

    • ulTRAX

      Why don’t you do some research to find out of that Right wing talking point is even true before you keep repeating it. 

      • Conner44

        Why don’t you refute it punk?

        • Ray in VT

          Seriously, what’s with all of the name calling today?

          • ulTRAX

            It must be an old grudge. Perhaps he thinks I made him look like a fool at some point in the past. Of course, as we can see, he needs no help in that dept. 

        • ulTRAX

          Schools out for the summer and the 4th graders are playing on the internet again!

          It’s not my job to do B’s homework. HE has the responsibility to know whether what he posts is true or not.

          • Conner44

            Ok, so you can’t, what a rube! 

          • ulTRAX

             Thanks for even another idiotic post. So according to you, braindead dittoheads can make ANY baseless claim they want and not have to prove anything… and the entire burden of proof falls on those who merely ask them to prove what they claim.

          • Conner44

            I assume you’re talking about yourself.  Just b/c you cut ‘n paste something baseless from the DNC doesn’t mean you don’t have to prove your claim.  

          • ulTRAX

            Is that now your 10th post where you have nothing intelligent to say?

            I haven’ t posted ANYTHING from the DNC… even as you defend B’s posting empty claims from the GOP.

            You’ve objected to my posting from the Constitution and the 1792 Militia Acts. You must consider history and law itself, to be some sort of liberal conspiracy. But then what can we expect from a 4th grader whose mommy doesn’t supervise his internet usage. 

          • Azra

            If you do it for him, HE’LL NEVER LEARN.

        • jefe68

          Real cute.

        • Zero

          Medicare Part D is currently riddled with fraud on the supplier side, making Part D the third leading driver of the deficits.  Obamacare reforms the supplier side making the current fraud practices, (such as a ear doctor treating someone dying from liver disease).  If you actually read the Ryan Budget, the republicans want to cut from the consumer side of Medicare, causing your premiums to go up while leaving the fraud untouched. 

          Then joe-blow, idiot republican comes on here, repeats superficial numbers he got from Fox News or some other propaganda arm, and you think republicans are actually looking out for the majority of Americas.  Ha!

  • Brandstad

    The Obamacare Two-Year CheckupDo you know the results of Obamacare two years after it was passed?Here is a clear document showing its effect.http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/03/the-obamacare-two-year-checkup-more-reasons-for-repeal

    • ulTRAX

      From page 51 of HERITAGE’S FOUNDATION’S 1989 HEALTH CARE PLAN: A National Health System for America: Under this arrangement, all households would be required to protect themselves from major medical costs by purchasing health insurance or enrolling in a prepaid health plan. The degree of financial  protection can be debated, but the principle of mandatory family protection is central to a universal health care system in America.

      So Heritage was for this plan before they were against it! ROTF

      • Brandstad

        With your logic, it could be said that Democrats are against civil rights and against minorities.

        In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.

        • ulTRAX

           YOU are the one who started this thread about ObamaCare… and as soon as it doesn’t go your way, you rush off on some other right wing rant. It’s just your way of avoiding a confrontation with your own ignorance. 

          • Brandstad

            What in the world are you talking about. 

            Blaming a group of people for thinking of an idea, bringing it to the public square for discussion then deciding it was a bad, wait, really bad idea and then blaming them when someone else decided to implament the bad idea 10 years later seems to be a bit of a stretch!

          • feettothefire

             Someone else being Mitt Romney, and it was seventeen years later.

          • ulTRAX

            If these ideas were so rejected by the GOP, Romney would not have adopted them as the model for Mass and, he hoped, the model for the US. This isn’t ancient history… only the past 5-6 years.

            What happened was once right wing ideas imploded the economy, the Right lacked the integrity and decency to rethink their own ideas. They absolved themselves of all blame and rushed to keep their base together by changing the subject… screaming Obama was a Socialist out to destroy the nation. So anything Obama was for had to be framed in that light… even if they were originally right wing ideas.

          • Guest

            Obama did promise to “Fundamentally Transform America”  Since America was already a functioning democracy, I wonder what he was planning to transform it into?!?!?  

            Can you tell me what Obama is Fundamentally Transforming America into?

          • http://reinventing-america.blogspot.com/ ulTRAX

            Beats me, I didn’t vote for him. Ask a loyalist. But there doesn’t have to be some sinister reason for that statement, if he made it. He may have deluded himself he could move the nation to a post-partisan era.

        • feettothefire

           Mitt Romney. Governor. Massachusetts. 2006. Citizens mandated to buy healthcare coverage. Please let us see you condemn this travesty.

  • dmorris

    Romney:  I’ll keep pre-existing conditions, allow individuals to keep current insurance, allow states to expand medicade.

    All planks of the Affordable Care Act.  

    • Brandstad

      They might be “All planks of the Affordable Care Act.” but Obamacare doesn’t deliver all of them …. does it LOL

      • Zero

        Actually, it does.  Romney wants to take away the mechanisms that pays for the things he “promises.”

        God, that sounds familiar.

    • Azra

      It’s his typical way of being vague about what he stands for, in an effort to appease all types of potential voters.

  • Brandstad

    SEE MUSLIM MOB STONE CHRISTIANS – IN U.S.!
    Hundreds chant, ‘Allahu Akbar!’ while hurling urine, eggs, bottles, concrete

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/muslim-mob-stones-christians-in-u-s/

    • Pagassae

      Liberty University?  Really?   An insane crowd of right wing phony christian nuts.

    • feettothefire

       SEE CHRISTIAN NATION INVADE AND OCCUPY MUSLIM NATION AND PRECIPITATE THE DEATHS OF TENS OF THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS – IN IRAQ!     Millions of ignorant Americans chant, “9/11, 9/11″ while being stupid and not giving a damn about innocent civilians.         News at 11:00        

      • Pagassae

        Brought to you by the USA and its MIC, and George Bush.

    • Zero

      At least you are against right wing religious fundamentalism.

  • Brandstad

    To understand healthcare in America, you have to think about bananas!

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/dummy-bears-guide-healthcare

    • Timmytool

      Good luck “shopping around for hospitals” when you’re in a medical emergency. You’re a great example of how “common sense” thinking doesn’t apply to complex systems, but since it makes it easier for your infantile mind to comprehend, it “feels” right to you and so it must be right. Also, take the American flag down from your icon, you flag waving cretin. 

      • Roy Mac

        He’s been gone for months; must be out of 8th grade for the summer.  A troll who doesn’t listen to the broadcast, just surfs the message board being inane.  There’s no return in trying to engage in any intelligent conversation with him.

      • Guest

        You can’t start to understand complex systems without understanding the individual inputs that drive the system.  

        I see the example wasn’t simple enough for you so I will try to find something easier for you to understand next time.

      • Iamnotageneral

        At least your name is accurate, you are a tool.

      • TFRX

        And the best part is, Brandstad is a male (if I remember correctly).

        His fantasy world also is never sullied by the real-world thought of a woman needing the Midnight Cab Ride to a real hospital.

        Yes, I mean emergency contraception, and abortion, while we’re on the subject. In some people’s minds, the marketplace will provide that as Catholic hospitals “merge” with other hospitals all over the country.

        • Azra

          Yes, he’s very odd.

      • Azra

        Though the name is not spelled quite the same, he could be the governor of Iowa, hence the flag. Judging by his contributions so far, it seems quite plausible.

  • Timmytool

    @ The Woman Who Called In Making $22,000.00. ObamaCare subsidizes your health care, so you can afford it. You need to visit the official health care website and educate yourself. Also, Katrina, you’re an idiot for not pointing this out. Instead, you rambled on for ten minutes on vague talking points. Why is it so hard for progressives to debunk lies when they hear them. Educate yourself! I learned about who is covered under the ACA by spending ten minutes on the website. You should be ashamed of yourself. 

  • Dave

    60 Minutes Exposes Specific Instances of Actionable High-Level Fraud at Citibank and Countrywide – It is being Actively Ignored

    These are not-to-be-missed videos, produced by CBS. Two high-level executive whistle-blowers are interviewed. Both encountered systemic fraud, reported it, and were relieved of their duties. Both are willing to act as witnesses. Our government is refusing to pursue actionable crimes perpetrated by people who brought this country to its knees. This redefines lack of accountability.
    Senior Fraud Investigator for the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, Tom Borgers, Found and Reported on Pervasive Fraud. It is being ignored.

    On the results of Borgers’ investigation: Borgers found pervasive fraud, committed across the board – by mortgage originators, underwriters, the banks, etc…

    On why over 800 bank officials went to jail following the S&L crisis, yet not one has gone to jail following our more recent crisis: Investigators had considerably more “support” following the S&L crisis.http://www.capitalismwithoutfailure.com/2012/06/michael-j-burry-failed-ideologues-are.html

    • Dave
      • Roy Mac

        You talk to yourself a lot.  There are medical professionals who specialize in your disorder; they’re listed in the Yellow Pages or at your State Board of Medicine.  You’d be a lot less unhappy if you got treatment–which, of course, is going to be available now that the ACA has been affirmed as the law of the land.

        • Dave

          Sounds like experience speaking, I’d think about uping your dosage.  I didn’t think it was possible, but you’re making less sense than usual.

        • Dave

          That Dave is not me Dave. Unlike you, I don’t go in for the ad homonyms.

    • Zero

      You should check out what Iceland did to their bankers and banking system.  It worked beautifully.  But I am certain republican heads would have blown up if Obama did the same thing.  But Obama and Bush should have done something along the lines of what Iceland did.

  • Dave

    Bill Black: US Promotes Flawed Economic Dogma that Encourages Fraud and Needlessly Perpetuates a Pattern of Recurring and Intensifying Financial Criseshttp://www.capitalismwithoutfailure.com/2012/03/bill-black-usa-exports-flawed-economic.html

  • feettothefire

        Won’t just one brave Republican/Conservative step up and say, “Since it’s wrong for government to tell people what they must buy, It was wrong for Romney to do it to the people of Massachusetts in 2006?” Won’t just one of them criticize Romney’s hypocrisy when he finds fault in Obama’s legislation for doing what his own legislation did in Massachusetts? JUST ONE! How can they watch this guy on the news for the last two days without being ashamed that this fraud was the best they could come up with?

    • Guest

      We’ll do almost anything to make you happy:  what the people of Massachusetts want for their state is not necessarily what the majority of the US population wants for our country.
       

      So now I’ve answered two of your questions:  why the MA individual mandate is funded by a penalty and not a tax, and that most of the country is not Massachusetts.
       

      I hope you’re giddy with knowledge now.  You’re welcome.

      • feettothefire

        I think you need some reading lessons, genius. I didn’t ask you about what the citizens of any state wanted. I asked you about what MITT ROMNEY wanted. Get it? MITT ROMNEY. HE wanted the mandate. HE thought it was a wonderful idea.  I asked why none of you hypocritical frauds will criticize the mandate he happily imposed on Massachusetts, while pretending that Obama’s mandate is some how different. I asked you to address Romney’s hypocrisy in doing the same. I can’t even imagine how my comment caused you to pull the penalty/tax issue out of your ass. I don’t even care about the penalty/tax issue you dunderhead. I’ll be giddy with knowledge when you learn to read and provide me with some. You’re welcome.

        • Guest

          Surely you’re being deliberately obtuse.  If not, I have sympathy for your dementia.
           

          Today 12:24 PM – TomK in Boston comment:  “So, if Etcha was a normal human being, he would have to confess to having forced a “massive” tax increase on the citizens of MA.”
           
          Today 12:44 PM – feettothefire reply:  “I’m still waiting for at least one conservative thinker here to explain Romney’s thinking on this.”

          • feettothefire

            As I said above, I don’t care about what you want to call it. Call it a tax. Call it a penalty. I…don’t… care. Try to force yourself to understand those three simple words. I can’t understand how Romney can justify his imposing whatever YOU want to call it on me, but still claim it’s wrong for Obama to do the same. A government mandate to purchase something is a government mandate to purchase something, regardless of who does the mandating, regardless of what it’s called. All you conservative panty-waists lack the stones to criticize Romney for insisting I buy health insurance, but you’re more than happy to criticize Obama for doing the same. That makes you unprincipled hacks. If you can’t criticize a man for doing something you consider to be wrong, simply because he’s on “your side,” you have no integrity at all. Why are you even here?                                 On the other hand, maybe you think it’s o.k. for Republicans to make me buy something, but not Democrats. That would make you even more ridiculous.

    • feettothefire

       So far I have one response, from the dim-wit below. Maybe someone who can actually answer the questions I asked could try next, rather than another clown who’s going to give answers to questions I haven’t asked and don’t care about. There must be at least one.

      • feettothefire

        The dim-wit below has responded a second time, but still no repudiation of Romney for that terrible ‘Romneycare” travesty. He’s babbling on about “tax,” “penalty,” “dementia,” but still no explanation  of Republican silence on Romney’s liberal actions in Massachusetts. I guess when one of them tries to give even a simple explanation, they really suck at it.

        • Guest

          I weighed the odds and decided that it was probably dementia and you are not being deliberately obtuse.  If you decide in 6 hours that you care about the penalty/tax issue again as you did at 12:44 PM, let me know and I will refer you to my previous answer.
           

          Can you conceive that someone may think something is a good idea for a small, liberal northeast state that comprises 2% of US population, but that the same idea may not be good for the country as a whole, which is much more diverse and less liberal, and 50 times larger?  I’d be more surprised if Massachusett’s programs were a good idea for the country.

          • feettothefire

             My response at 12:44 concerned Tomk’s mention of the “mandate”. You conveniently chose to leave that line out in your reply below.                                          12:44P.M.: Tomk- “Etchasketch introduced the “individual “mandate” in his Ma Romneycare                                                                                    How cute of you. I welcome you to search high and low in the comments of the last two days and find any concern from me about the penalty/tax issue. I don’t care. Old news. Done. I care so little about the issue, I don’t even know how I feel. You’re hung up on the Supreme Court Decision. I’m talking about Republican bullshit. I think I used the name Romney in at least 80% of my comments, having nothing to do with the SCOTUS decision.  But hey, I thank you enormously for your second paragraph above. While all the rest of the conservatives are claiming that government has no right to require us to purchase a product, you take the courageous position that they most certainly do. Governors of states can push through mandates requiring residents to purchase insurance. That’s exactly the kind of statement I asked for. Why did it take you so long? I’m sure the Republicans here would take issue with you. Now that wasn’t hard, was it?

          • feettothefire

            By the way Romney’s a “severe” conservative. since when is it the responsibility of conservative governors to kow-tow to liberals in his own state. Was the severely conservative dilettante really a liberal sympathizer, or was he too much of a wimp to veto a severely liberal bill? Was he lying to us when he said he was “severely conservative,” or when he said this terrible liberal legislation was a good thing?

      • Azra

        Don’t bet on it. While we’re on the topic of replies being put with the wrong comments, wonder why we haven’t been hearing from Warren?

  • J__o__h__n

    Dave post generator.  Randomize the following words:
     
    Liberty, red herring, tyranny, rule of law, enlightened dictator, establishment, crony, utopia, sheep, gestalt
     
    Post.  Repeat.  Change name every few weeks.

    • Dave

      Another fine substantive reply. Keep defending that status quo!

      • jefe68

        So you agree with him. I particularly like “rule of law” and “enlightened dictator”.  They really are such poignant phrases that mean nothing.
        Exactly what is the rule of law?

        Is it what just what you believe in or based on laws written by Congress and state legislators. 

        • Dave

          You guys’ allegiance to the DNC, trust in the status quo and ignorance of these foundational principles illiterates precisely why we as a nation are where we are today.

          “Exactly what is the rule of law?”

          It would be one thing if you guys took those issues, demonstrated an understanding of them, of the points being made, and then rationally refuted them, but of course that’s asking too much.

          Why have there been 0 prosecutions of Wall St. Bankers since the financial crisis?

          What does Rule of Law mean?

          Why is the Obama administration as intertwined with big finance as Bush was and Clinton before?

          Do your homework and get back to us. Your simplistic partisan team spirit is boring and contributes nothing to real reform.

          • Iamnotageneral

            True dat.

          • J__o__h__n

            I criticize the Democrats often.  Wall St should be prosecuted.  Both parties are flawed but one is far worse than the other. 

            Disagreeing with you is not evidence of ignorance of founding principles.

          • TFRX

            I don’t know that he can figure out any liberal as being left of the DNC.

            Why is it every libertarian wants to fight the bogeyman of lefties they see on TV, and only on TV?

          • Dave

            I was a good lefty. Good intentions aren’t enough anymore. I fear corrupted power more than redneck neighbors.

      • J__o__h__n

        “status quo” – Damn, I forgot one!  Where was the benevolent dictator when I needed one?

  • feettothefire

    Boy, look at that stock market soar today. Don’t those fools know it’s the end of America as we know it?

    • Azra

      Fools, indeed. :•)

  • Dave

    Time to Take off the Blinders about Obama Taking off the Gloveshttp://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/06/time-to-take-off-the-blinders-about-obama-taking-off-the-gloves.html

  • Azra

    I can’t believe it! Democrats have finally managed to shame Republicans into doing the right thing. (It goes without saying that they WON’T do the right thing until hours before the deadline. They love the attention, and it also makes them feel more powerful.) Rates on student loans won’t be doubling in the near future, and people will FINALLY be allowed to work again, repairing, reinforcing, and rebuilding America’s infrastructure. What took them so long to realize what was needed?

    • Dave

      Can’t wait for the University/Finance/Student Loan bubble to burst….

      What do we short? Sallie Mae?

    • mikey

      Goldman Sach is up to 44 Trillion in notional value of Credit Default Swaps. Citigroup’s derivatives genius – Jack Lew is Obama’s chief of staff. Obama has fewest number of SEC prosecutions of ANY President including Bush.  No prosecutions for rampant criminality during the housing bubble. Ten times the amount of leverage in the derivatives market over the last 4 years. Ben Bernenke reconfirmed as Fed Chief.  

  • JoeMarfaTX

    Supreme Court decision – Healthcare Law
     
    “If ‘they’ only would get off their — and get a job…” or “I’ve worked all my life, nobody’s given me anything…” or, “Why should I have to pay for my health insurance and, now, “theirs”?
     
    Let’s get something straight. Our Capitalist system has to have unemployment to keep labor rates down, at least 5%. When there was close to full employment, like in the ’60′s and ’70′s, we had double digit inflation. Food prices sometimes went up weekly, at least monthly. Home mortgage rates were 19%, with 20-25% down, no exceptions. You had to have a savings account, with money in it. Your credit rating had to be right up there or you’d have to get your parents to co-sign the loan. Good luck with that today.

    Don’t tell me “why do we have to pay for “their” healthcare”. There never will be a time when there won’t be people without a job. That’s not how our system works. 

    Oh, and by the way, if we’re going to repeal “Obamacare”, don’t stop there. Repeal Social Security payments, medicaid and medicare, government employee pension funds and … unemployment insurance. Let’s be fair, the “Great 2008 Recession” workers without a job, losing their houses…are they now “people who should just get up off their sofas and get a job”, too?

    Of course not, the new “they” need help, a lot of it, just like the “those other people” still do and always will.

    • Azra

      We must never forget that at any moment, without warning, tragedy might strike. In the blink of an eye, “we” could join “them”.

      • Roy Mac

        Good observation.  “Successful” people rarely acknowledge how large a role luck plays in all of life, nor how much “success” depends upon contributions from others.

  • Greyman

    In news not gotten to in this morning’s hour: another solar-powered bankruptcy. Abound, a solar-panel company based in Colorado, designee of $400 million Federal loan of which some $68 million was expended, has filed for bankruptcy. Over 120 workers at the company’s mfg. plant in Indiana are to be laid off. Obama really knows this industry well, does he not? Still, $400 million is less than the $455 million+ that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, another of our Federally-financed “not-for-profit” corporations, receives annually . . . . 

    • feettothefire

      What an excellent post. Regretfully, you failed to mention the giant gobs of money that Big Oil and Agriculture get from the feds in subsidies and tax breaks, an amount that dwarfs the examples you give above,  not to mention the amount given to Wall St with that lovely Tarp thing. The amount given to Citibank alone could cover the federal donations to NPR for fifty years. Must have been an oversight on your part.

      • Greyman

        Well, I can’t think of everything: I also failed to note that actual talent is required in order to spend over $565,000 just to render one solar-panel industry employee unemployed. Imagine: government “investment” adding to existing unemployment woe. Obama’s not even very good at throwing someone else’s money away to help his own re-election.

      • Dave

        Big oil doesn’t get any money from the government  dimwit, they just pay less in taxes for doing what the government is incentivizing.  Where in the public sector or academia does an idiot like you work?

        • feettothefire

          You’ll note above that I acknowledged the tax breaks to Big Oil, unless you chose simply to ignore those words.To most people, a tax break equals money. And you really haven’t heard of federal subsidies to oil companies? Really?? I wonder what those subsidies are. Maybe the government bakes them cookies. You really are as much of a dolt as the guys further down have claimed.

          • Conner44

            Nice try, I’m sure your ability to bend is appreciated by your boyfriend.

          • feettothefire

             Thanks for the one sentence. How long will it take you to recover from that exhausting effort?

        • jimino

          Big oil is subsidized by highway, defense, intelligence, etc. funding.  It is the largest ultimate beneficiary of federal spending.  Ask a libertarian.  They can explain it to you.

          • feettothefire

             The jughead above is going to tell us that billions of dollars in tax breaks to a particular industry or business isn’t a subsidy. I’m sure he’ll also dispute the fact that cut rate leases on public land and the profits they get from the wells they dig on that land, land that I wouldn’t even be allowed to have a barbecue on, doesn’t subsidize their operations either.

          • Dave

            There’s no equivalence between the taxpayer money the government gives to clean energy debacles and the breaks oil companies and mortgage-payers get, dimrod.  Your ideology is crap and it can’t mask your ignorance.

          • feettothefire

             Of course there’s equivalence. Money is money, unless you think it’s not. Let’s move on to agriculture subsidies, shall we? Ooh, those clean energy debacles must surely be depriving all those factory farms and corn growers of all that big federal money they so desperately need.

          • Dave

            Moving on because your point has no validity.  Next.

          • feettothefire

             Money isn’t money? Aren’t you a smart feller.

          • Dave

            Cashflow nidrod.

          • Dave

            too pathetic to even respond to

          • Gregg

            If no money is exchanged then how is it possible to call it a subsidy? It’s not.

    • JW_Colorado

      From Colorado…the Chinese government supports their solar industry with the intent of driving other competition out of the market.  It’s not that the business model was bad, it has just been destroyed by unfair market practices.  Now if the US just gave its solar industry money (like China did), then you might have a point, but it didn’t and you don’t. 

      • feettothefire

         If the U.S. government gave money to the solar industry, how could it continue to pay farmers to not grow things? How could the poor oil companies survive without those federal subsidies.

        • Azra

          No more subsidies for poor oil companies? It doesn’t bear thinking about!

      • Greyman

        If we know and fully realize the Chinese are indulging in “unfair market practice” (id est: state capitalism), and we’re not quite prepared to match them on that basis (and we’re not, politically), why fritter away even $68 million just to prove the point? Obama’s “investment” philosophy is untethered even from common sense.

    • ulTRAX

       It’s always amusing when our Right wing friends complain about NPR which provides an invaluable service… yet is utterly silent about the vast amounts of money pissed away on interest each year… 2.9 TRILLION just during Bush’s eight year junta. So in 2008 Bush spent $451 billion on interest which bought the American People nothing…  http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

      And that’s about 990x what was spent on NPR… if that 455 million figure is accurate.

      As for subsidizing solar… perhaps the big mistake here is thinking we can do so with one hand while the other allows cheap imports into the nation.  

      • Greyman

        If
        that $445 million figure is accurate, Federal spending per NPR listener head
        can be appraised at $16.86 per annual NPR head, with NPR’s weekly audience of
        26,400,000, little more than a dollar a month. (I assume that NPR’s weekly listeners indulge in all kinds of economic activity, resulting in active economic participation and secular economy stimulation, activity directly generated by and suggested in the course of NPR/PRI/APM presenting the daily fare: GIving a reasonably precise figure to this total annual spending generated in the secular economy as a result of 26,400,000 persons’ weekly exposure to NPR/PRI/APM programming would be a welcome datum altogether, it could be said.) Otherwise: $16.86 a year per listener is not much of an indulgence, then, is it? I only mention that I never hear
        NPR or the CPB interrogate their own cost effectiveness in public, I’m only curious. I’m
        sure and quite certain the “Planet Money” team could do one superb job explaining the actual economic circumstances and relate CPB’s and NPR’s respective corporate viewpoints concerning things that CPB’s dedicated viewers and listeners and NPR’s eager listeners might or mightn’t gladly want to hear. I would be keen to hear myself and would not protest reliable evidence of the complete and utter cost effectiveness of the CPB and NPR and even PBS, all alike from top to bottom. (NASA funding, we are told, boosts the economy of each and every one of the fifty states of the US, again via Wikipedia.) Could such an explanation merit or entail a discussion of a one-hour show, or could the subject merit two back-to-back one-hour shows any day next week excepting Friday? Great teachable moment, et cetera: learning how much of our money is where our fatigued ears and eyes are.  

        • feettothefire

           We all get the fact that you don’t like public funding of NPR and PBS. Boy do we get it. For two days you’ve been involved in what’s known as “Beating a dead horse.” The federal government gives money to a lot of organizations and individuals, in many forms. Outright cash. Subsidies in various forms. College grants. Tax breaks. Why, I get one of those tax breaks myself, on my mortgage interest deduction. Shame on me for saving money through a government loophole. And let us not forget the ubiquitous “earmarks,” many of which I’m sure are procured by congressmen and senators who despise the idea of funding the CPB, but are more than happy to bring home the bacon to their constituents in order to fund a local museum or caterpillar research project. I’ll agree with de-funding NPR and PBS when the money to everyone else is taken away. Until then, thank god for”Frontline,” Nova,” and “Talk of the Nation.” If your eyes and ears are so fatigued by these shows, I suggest you turn them off and switch to the  quality programming offered by commercial media, shows like “The Bachellorette,” “Jersey Shore,” and “The Today Show,” also known as three hours of stupid fluff.

          • Greyman

            Nay nay nay nay nay! My intuition tells me only that some someone associated with the production of “On Point” knows for a certainty that I positively thrive on public radio. This someone would be aware that I listen earnestly and closely. I don’t expect close familiarity from this someone, mind you, but anyone paying me any mind at all knows that the decade I’ve spent away from TV viewing has not impaired the quality of my sleep.

          • feettothefire

             Your intuition needs some work. And I find it passing strange that you thrive on a  ” media mini-empire that succeeds only in reproducing the bilge generated by commercial media.” Thriving on bilge? That’s a new one on me.

          • Greyman

            Oh this bilge is flavorful enough, some of it actually nutritious, and besides, I don’t dine on it exclusively: I do without the stellar celebrity interviews, don’t listen to too much of the music, avoid all the trivia and variety shows, et cetera. And who really has time for ALL the political nonsense . . . ?

      • feettothefire

        The
        farming industry in this country gets over 20 BILLION dollars in
        federal subsidies every year, and this guys spent two days going on
        about NPR. If he’s really concerned with wasteful government spending,
        he should learn a bit about prioritizing his outrage.

  • Zero

    I finished reading Gulliver’s Travels last night.  I thought I might share a passage.  Here, Gulliver tries to explain the “Yahoos” of England to the Houyhnhnm:

    “I was much pains to describe to him the use of money, the materials it was made of, and the value of the metals; that when a Yahoo had got a great store of this precious substance, he was able to purchase whatever he had a mind to, the finest clothing, the noblest houses, great tracts of land, the most costly meats and drinks, and have his choice of the most beautiful females.  Therefore since money alone was able to perform all these feats, our Yahoos thought they could never have enough of it to spend or to save, as they found themselves inclined from their natural bent either to profusion or avarice.  That the rich man enjoyed the fruit of the poor man’s labour, and the latter were a thousand to one in proportion to the former.  That the bulk of our people was forced to live miserably, by labouring every day for small wages to make a few live plentifully. 

    I enlarged myself much on these and many other particulars to the same purpose: but [the Houyhnhnm] was still to seek: for [the Houyhnhnm] went upon a supposition that all animals had a title to their share in the productions of the earth, and especially those who presided over the rest.  Therefore, he desired I would let him know, what these costly meats were, and how any of us happened to want them.  Whereupon I enumerated as many sorts as came into my head, with the various methods of dressing them, which could not be done without sending vessels by sea to every part of the world, as well for liquors to drink, as for sauces, and innumerable other conveniencies.  I assured him, that this whole globe of earth must be at least three times gone round, before one of our better female Yahoos could get her breakfast, or a cup to put it in.  [The Houyhnhnm] said, “That must needs be a miserable country which cannot furnish food for its own inhabitants.”

    But what [the Houyhnhnm] chiefly wondered at was how such vast tracts of ground as I described should be wholly without fresh water, and the people put to the necessity of sending over the sea for drink.  I replied, that England (the dear place of my nativity) was computed to produce three times the quantity of food more than its inhabitants are able to consume, as well as liquors extracted from grain, or pressed out of fruit of certain trees, which made excellent drink, and the same proportion in every other convenience of life.  But in order to feed the luxury and intemperance of the males, and the vanity of the females, we sent away the greatest part of our necessary things to other countries, from whence in return we brought the materials of diseases, folly, and vice, to spend among ourselves.  Hence it follows of necessity, that vast numbers of our people are compelled to seek their livelihood by begging, robbing, stealing, cheating, pimping, forswearing, flattering, suborning, forging, gaming, lying, fawning, hectoring, voting, scribbling, star-gazing, poisoning, whoring, canting, libelling, free-thinking, and the like occupations: every one of which terms, I was at much pains to make [the Houyhnhnm] understand.”

    –Jonathan Swift

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cacimbo-Smith/1142235495 Cacimbo Smith

    Reporting FAIL. Contempt vote bi-partisan. 17 Dems voted to hold AG in contempt. Yet discussed as a party line vote.  

    • jimino

      More accurately NRA dictated vote.  And can someone explain why the NRA is so upset with a program that puts more guns in the hands of those who want them?  I thought that was their stated goal.

  • JGC

    One thing that bothers me is how some folks treat healthcare as just another commodity, like following investments in silver futures or shorting clean energy or a rally in cotton demand.  

    This is healthcare.  This is life or death for our neighbors.

    • potter

      clean energy is not just another commodity either

      • JGC

        I’m sorry, I will correct myself on this one. I think it was at the forefront of my mind because further along someone seemed to be exulting in the current straits of the solar industry.  

    • Greyman

      Exactly: as in the formula “abortion is a healthcare procedure”, for instance.

      • B Smith

        Exactly: as in the formula “once again Greyman’s ideological slip is showing”, for instance.

        • Greyman

          Oh come on: you don’t REALLY think I’m a crypto-socialist, do you? or have I ever given you reason to think so?

    • Pagassae

      Healthcare should never be a moneymaking business. In a truly “christian” Nation, making money from the suffering of others is at best: IMMORAL.

      Nobody cares who dies or suffers, as long as a buck is to be made. Good christians, and corporations can be the most evil of individuals and organizations when run for profit. Healthcare should never be a for profit business.

      Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully
      as when they do it from religious conviction.”–  Blaise Pascal

      • Greyman

        The provision of medicine and medical attention HAVE NEVER BEEN FREE. It remains the case, here in early summer 2012, that the provision of medicine and medical attention IS NOT FREE. Expense and payment are involved. Your “should never be” is thus safely replaced by (or read for) “ever has been and continues to be” conducted in terms of dollars. I think you might better count on the actual functioning of the real economy. The economy of the US medical establishment works in terms of dollars. You may construe the whole sum of the US healthcare economy as mammon if you like, but that sounds as if it could be an extreme religious attitude to hold itself.  

  • feettothefire

           Has anyone else noticed this new jackass who’s trying to take over our old friend Modavations place as most pathetic contributor to the space. I think his/her name is “Boner44,” or something like that. I’ve noticed his/her little single sentence replies all over the place. I received one this morning. They’re never anything more than some simple-minded, sophomoric name calling, and they never express an idea. If one is really into name calling, that’s fine. But at least put some meat behind it. Can someone please tell me what makes stupid pin-heads like this poor soul think they have anything to offer to a forum like this one? If they’ll never bother to contribute an original comment or idea of their own, because they’re too stupid to be able to string together more than ten words at a time, why do they even WANT to be here. Is it just so they can try to make fun of people far smarter than them? Can’t they just stick with sesame street?

    • ulTRAX

      Conner44, a reference to his IQ, is a 4th grader whose mommy isn’t supervising his internet usage. Moda was was over 60, obviously brain damaged by his repeated exposure to lead paint and mercury. As he once wrote: I explained that we rolled busted thermometer mercury in our hands,chewed on
      lead paint,,played in
      trees 100′ in the air,bicycled without helmets,smashed 50 rolls of caps with
      boulders,hunted frogs and snakes like on a safari.I further pointed out our
      mothers breast fed us while smoking butts.And miraculously me and all my mates
      are just fine.
      Sorry Moda, where ever you are, all the evidence points to another conclusion. 

      • feettothefire

         The farming industry in this country gets over 20 BILLION dollars in federal subsidies every year, and this guys spent two days going on about NPR. If he’s really concerned with wasteful government spending, he should learn a bit about prioritizing his outrage.

    • Azra

      Inbreeding?

      • feettothefire

         How stupid do two cousins have to be to produce that dope?

        • Azra

          . . . or brothers and sisters, for that matter.

        • Gregg

          There sure are a lot of useless comments with juvenile name calling.

          • feettothefire

             Name calling can often be quite useful. Especially when applied to moronic imbeciles like this dim-witted, addle-brained, embodiment of stupidity.   But, as I stated above,  “Name calling is fine, but at least put some meat behind it”  and  “If you’re going to call someone a “punk” or a “rube,” don’t you tell them why you think their punks or rubes?” I believe I lived up to these requirements in this dildos case quite nicely.

    • Roy Mac

      They’re hard to miss, aren’t they?  I say “they,” but more than likely, it’s one or two people using handles like Modavations, David, Conner44, Branstad, and a few others.  They all do the same thing:  no original thought and probably they don’t even listen to the broadcast.  All they do is troll through the board and try to provoke.  I just try to avoid being baited into a response with it/them.

      • feettothefire

        This guy is really special, though. The kind of empty-headed stuff he writes makes our friend Modavations seem normal by comparison. If you’re going to call someone a “punk” or a “rube,” don’t you tell them WHY you think they’re punks or rubes? Boner44′s all over the place, but he hasn’t offered a single idea. Even Moda. offered an idea now and then. They were usually paranoid- schitzo ideas, but they were something. Guys like this are what fuel the stereotype of the little twerpy geek, sitting in his mommies basement in his little underpants, giggling at the computer like a twelve year old.

        • Azra

          Maybe he IS a twelve-year-old.

  • Dave

    Just so you know, this recent Dave with the name calling, is not me, “liberty” Dave.

  • RonTraver

    I would love to hear an in-depth discussion of David Goldhill’s article on healthcare “How American Health Care Killed My Father” in Atlantic magazine in 2009. Seems very relevant in this political contest, a very different proposal by a Democrat that has won praise from conservatives. If you could get him on the program along with health care wonks across the liberal-conservative spectrum, maybe you could work your magic and drill down to some fundamental issues here. I love your show.

ONPOINT
TODAY
Sep 16, 2014
Jasmin Torres helps classmate Brianna Rameles with a worksheet at the Diloreto Magnet School in New Britain, Conn., Wednesday Feb. 22, 2012. (AP/Charles Krupa)

More parents are “red-shirting” their children in kindergarten—holding them back for a year, hoping they’ll have an edge. Does it work? We look.

Sep 16, 2014
From "Rich Hill"

“Rich Hill,” a new documentary on growing up poor, now, in rural America. The dreams and the desperation.

RECENT
SHOWS
Sep 15, 2014
This Monday, Sept. 27, 2010 file photo shows hikers on the South Kaibab Trail in Grand Canyon National Park, Ariz. (AP/Carson Walker)

Uproar over development plans for the Grand Canyon. We go to the Navajo Nation and the Canyon floor to see what’s at stake.

 
Sep 15, 2014
In this Thursday, Sep. 11, 2014 photo, Middle Eastern leaders stand together during a family photo with of the Gulf Cooperation Council and regional partners at King Abdulaziz International Airport’s Royal Terminal in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia. (AP/Brendan Smialowski, Pool)

President Obama says he will build a coalition of partners in the Middle East to combat ISIS. We’ll do a reality check on who’s really stepping up for what.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Our Week In The Web: September 12, 2014
Friday, Sep 12, 2014

In which you had varied reactions to the prospect of a robotic spouse.

More »
Comment
 
Beverly Gooden on #WhyIStayed
Friday, Sep 12, 2014

Beverly Gooden — who originated the #WhyIStayed hashtag that has taken off across Twitter — joined us today for our discussion on domestic violence.

More »
1 Comment
 
Tierney Sutton Plays LIVE For On Point
Friday, Sep 5, 2014

We break out Tierney Sutton’s three beautiful live tracks from our broadcast today for your listening pleasure.

More »
2 Comments