States Launch Lawsuits Against Health Care Plan

[kokonut]

When Obama signs this bill, it becomes law.

Do you realize now what they did?

Did you realize that he was going to make average ordinary citizens criminals if they did not purchase health insurance?

How about having a law for drivers who drive, get into an accident, and they are allowed to buy auto insurance after the fact?

 

[Jiro]

minor update - 10 states line up to sue over health bill, Florida AG says - CNN.com

Bill McCollum, the Republican attorney general under fellow Republican Gov. Charlie Crist, told a news conference that the lawsuit would be filed once President Obama signs the health care bill into law. He said he'll be joined by his counterparts in Alabama, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington.

"This is a tax or a penalty on just living, and that's unconstitutional," he said of the mandate to purchase health coverage. "There's no provision in the Constitution of the United States giving Congress the power to do that."

McCollum also said that portions of the bill would force states to spend money they don't have, which he called a violation of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution.

"There's no way we can do what's required in this bill and still provide for education, for foster care, for the incarceration of prisoners, all the other things that are in this bill," he said.

 

[Lighthouse77]

How about having a law for drivers who drive, get into an accident, and they are allowed to buy auto insurance after the fact?

I thought they already do allow this. It is consider a high risk car insurance and it is extremely expensive. Or did you mean, paying for the accident?

I can avoid car insurance if I feel I can't afford it, and I have. But that's why they offer Metro/public transportation. But I can't avoid health insurance. But I guess that's why they offer public option.

 

[Tousi]

I thought they already do allow this. It is consider a high risk car insurance and it is extremely expensive. Or did you mean, paying for the accident?

I can avoid car insurance if I feel I can't afford it, and I have. But that's why they offer Metro/public transportation. But I can't avoid health insurance. But I guess that's why they offer public option.

In CA, it is mandatory (by the State) that you have car insurance. This is on top of car insurance being mandatory (by the insurance companies) if you are financing the car.

 

[Lighthouse77]

yes, in my state, you can have a driver license, but don't have a car, then you do not need to insurance. You also can't drive a car that is not in your name if the person didn't list you in it's insurance.

 

[Jiro]

yes, in my state, you can have a driver license, but don't have a car, then you do not need to insurance. You also can't drive a car that is not in your name.

what!? really? I find that hard to believe. What about husband and wife? Only one name can appear in the paper.... unless it shows both names

 

[Lighthouse77]

i'm sorry, I mean your name in some insurances, they expect you to list people who will be driving your car. I don't mean cars itself.

 

[Jiro]

i'm sorry, I mean your name in some insurances, they expect you to list people who will be driving your car. I don't mean cars itself.

ah yes.... yea same here. I think it's same for pretty much most states.

 

[Reba]

if the world does thing my way, everyone would be living in tribes or colonies.

Something I have observed from the Anabaptists... when they feel that their community is too big (usually in surplus of 50-100 families or more) and that people are not being completely honest, they split up.

I belong to an independent Baptist church, which is similar in many ways to the Anabaptists. As our church has grown, we have helped establish "baby" churches throughout our area rather than becoming a mega church. (Not because we believe large groups of people are less honest but because we believe this way more closely follows the New Testament pattern of church planting.)

Once the baby church gets a stable membership and can be financially self supporting, they become independent. They get full title and deed to their property, and full autonomy.

 

[Reba]

I wonder what the reaction is going to be when Americans realize that the next item on Obama's agenda is granting Amnesty to illegal aliens.

And, I am ever so curious what reactions there will be when Americans realize they will be forced to pay for health insurance for the sole reason that former illegal aliens can receive healthcare.

Please, one headache at a time.

 

[Reba]

In CA, it is mandatory (by the State) that you have car insurance. This is on top of car insurance being mandatory (by the insurance companies) if you are financing the car.

We have the same law in South Carolina. You can't register your car without insurance.

 

[TXgolfer]

ah yes.... yea same here. I think it's same for pretty much most states.

Nah, in TX it is the vehicle that is insured....not the driver. You can drive any insured vehicle here. But some insurance won't cover unlisted drivers under 25....but that is a policy of the company.....not a law

 

[rockdrummer]

Let the games begin!!

 

[Lighthouse77]

Nah, in TX it is the vehicle that is insured....not the driver. You can drive any insured vehicle here. But some insurance won't cover unlisted drivers under 25....but that is a policy of the company.....not a law

That's what we were talking about. I just worded all wrong. BUT if the owner is a High risk (too many driving record), then he have to take a high risk insurance policy for his car. I think this apply to any listed drivers as well.

 

[yizuman]

75%? How did you found that 75% of Americans are against it?

Obama and rest of congresses are elected by people so they voted for them.

So did the German people who Voted for Hitler.

Yiz

 

[Steinhauer]

Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death
March 23, 1775 By Patrick Henry


No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the house. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the house is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at the truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the numbers of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received?


Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation.


There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free--if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength but irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.


It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

 

[Steinhauer]

Hitler's enabling act destroyed Democracy in Germany.

On March 23, 1933, the newly elected members of the German Parliament (the Reichstag) met in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin to consider passing Hitler's Enabling Act. It was officially called the 'Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich.' If passed, it would effectively mean the end of democracy in Germany and establish the legal dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.

The 'distress' had been secretly caused by the Nazis themselves in order to create a crisis atmosphere that would make the law seem necessary to restore order.

Just before the vote, Hitler made a speech to the Reichstag in which he pledged to use restraint.

"The government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures...The number of cases in which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is in itself a limited one." - Hitler told the Reichstag.

He also promised an end to unemployment and pledged to promote peace with France, Great Britain and the Soviet Union. But in order to do all this, Hitler said, he first needed the Enabling Act.

A two thirds majority was needed, since the law would actually alter the German constitution. Hitler needed 31 non-Nazi votes to pass it. He got those votes from the Center Party after making a false promise to restore some basic rights already taken away by decree.

 

[TXgolfer]

I beat up a guy named Patrick Henry in third grade......Probably a different guy


He rubbed clover in a girls hair during recess.