Did the Supreme Court’s initial ObamaCare vote leak to Obama?

posted at 10:19 pm on April 2, 2012 by Allahpundit

Unless he’s trying to goose a slow news day with speculation, I have no idea why Drudge is pushing the “leak” angle. There’s nothing about it in the Reuters story he links to and, as far as I saw, nothing in O’s comments today in the Rose Garden to suggest he had inside info. If he had seized on some obscure part of last week’s arguments, like the Anti-Injunction Act, then that might have been a clue that something the media had overlooked was weighing heavily inside the Court’s own deliberations and that O had gotten wind of it. But he didn’t. He gave a straightforward pitch that, unless the Court rules his way, it’s illegitimate. I expected nothing less. Neither, I’m sure, did Anthony Kennedy, who has three months to make up his mind and therefore probably isn’t a firm yes or no yet. And, if you’ve been reading liberal pundits lately, neither did you.

Speaking of which, having endured a “train wreck” and a “plane wreck” at the Supreme Court last week, Jeffrey Toobin shakes off the trauma and joins in the left’s newfound appreciation for why judicial activism is a bad thing:

For example, the Justices had no trouble upholding the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which used the [Commerce Clause] to mandate the integration of hotels and restaurants. “It may be argued that Congress could have pursued other methods to eliminate the obstructions it found in interstate commerce caused by racial discrimination,” Justice Tom C. Clark wrote, for his unanimous brethren. “But this is a matter of policy that rests entirely with the Congress, not with the courts. How obstructions in commerce may be removed—what means are to be employed—is within the sound and exclusive discretion of the Congress.” In other words, Justice Kennedy had it backward. The “heavy burden” is not on the defenders of the law but on its challengers. Acts of Congress, like the health-care law, are presumed to be constitutional, and it is—or should be—a grave and unusual step for unelected, unaccountable, life-tenured judges to overrule the work of the democratically elected branches of government

It is simply not the Supreme Court’s business to be making these kinds of judgments. The awesome, and final, powers of the Justices are best exercised sparingly and with restraint. Their normal burdens of interpreting laws are heavy enough. No one expects the Justices to be making health-care policy any more than we expect them to be picking Presidents, which, it may be remembered, is not exactly their strength, either.

Rest assured, if Obama wins reelection and replaces Scalia or Kennedy with a hardcore liberal, the revered principle of judicial deference to Congress will be power-flushed down the toilet once a Republican president and legislature are in office together again. But never mind that, and never mind the fact that he sidesteps the question of whether people who aren’t participating in commerce are reachable by the Commerce Clause. He seems to be imagining here an almost conclusory deference to Congress by the Court on all things commerce. Imagine that the Court took his advice and declared that the “heavy burden” is on the states to show why Congress doesn’t have this entirely novel power to force people to buy things. What would the states have to show to convince Justice Toobin that they’d met that burden? This is a case of first impression so there’s no direct precedent that either side can point to. What argument, then, could the states theoretically make to convince Toobin that Congress had exceeded its commerce power? I’ve got a sneaking suspicion that, like so much of the left, he thinks there is no conceptual limit on the Commerce Clause except the Bill of Rights. If you can’t show that the mandate violates, say, the Establishment Clause or the Free Exercise Clause, then you’re out of luck. But that’s absurd; the whole point of enumerated powers is to set limits on what Congress can do apart from the Bill of Rights (which, of course, wasn’t even part of the Constitution originally). Within that larger context of circumscribed federal power, when you have Congress seeking to do something that it’s never done before, why should its prerogative enjoy heavy deference and not the states’?

Here’s Mark Levin unloading on The One for his comments about the Court today. Click the image to listen.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Personally I loathe Obama… can’t help it. I cannot even stand to listen to the man speak. I read both of his books in 2008 to see what all the hype was about, got real nervous after the first book, after reading the second I said to my husband ” you have got to read this, this man is a communist, or a marxist, not sure which”..I then immediately volunteered for John McCain’s campaign…his books scared the hell out of me….but I digress.

In regard to Obama’s congress comment, I don’t give a rats ass what the congress unanimously voted on, they do not have the support of the people. In my own humble opinion, the destruction of Obamacare by the Supreme Court would be better than winning the presidency.

shar61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 PM

My guess is that he was tipped off by a certain “white hispanic”.

crosspatch on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Sell that to the American people.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Don’t have to; polls indicate that the American people already know this.

Practice, young Jedi; you may get better.

massrighty on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Did the Supreme Court’s initial ObamaCare vote leak to Obama?

Golly, who knows? Let’s speculate, shall we?

Mark Levin, meanwhile, is spot-on as usual.

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

They can go on State Medicaid, or Dual eligible Medicare part D nitwit

Conservative4ev on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Sell that to the American people.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

They’re sold. Polls show a plurality want this version of healthcare to die.

itsspideyman on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Hmm…

SlaveDog on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 PM

Thanks for that flag…

Coaching…

But my original wording…well??

Electrongod on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

If you are already sick…then its not insurance. It’s welfare.

Spliff Menendez on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Thank you for your honesty

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

LOL. The HotAir punching bag.

Cleombrotus on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 PM

I actually almost feel sorry for this one. Being liberal4life is a pretty shitty way to go thru life.

Aviator on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

We need the people to see what a POS little Bammie really is. Strip away the mask.

slickwillie2001 on April 2, 2012 at 10:49 PM

The anger level is only gonna increase. Dee-licious!

Lanceman on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Sell that to the American people.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

If the legislation stands, it won’t have to be sold. Look up the “complete lives system” and be as afraid as the rest of us.

wolfsDad on April 2, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Reading comprehension FAIL.

Please go back and read my post slowly and carefully. Really, it’s not that hard to do.

I never said “Let them die”, a direct quote that you incorrectly and dishonestly attribute to me.

Dealing with a problem is not the same as letting someone die. Families have, for centuries (perhaps millennia) , found ways of caring for sick family members without passing 3000 page laws that just burden society with problems that they don’t want to deal with.

retard.

UltimateBob on April 2, 2012 at 10:46 PM

It was a paraphrase, but I agree you didn’t come right out and say let them die. You just advocated policies that would do that.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:52 PM

I like how the Lefty losers are asking what will happen to the sick once Obamacare is thrown in the dustbin of history. The question assumes it’ll be thrown out. The Left knows. They know the game is up.

What will Republicans do? I guarantee there will be dancing in the streets and the kind of jubilation you would associate with the end of a war where we kicked the enemy’s ass so badly they’ll think twice about starting trouble again. An uplifting, healthy sigh of relief.

EMD on April 2, 2012 at 10:52 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

They can go on State Medicaid, or Dual eligible Medicare part D nitwit

Conservative4ev on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Medicaid has an income requirement. Most middle class families will not qualify.

If you are calling for medicaid expansion that I agree with you. We can expand medicaid to fix most of these issues.

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?
liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

Nothing. They are on their own. Who cares if they all die?

Uppereastside on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

But my original wording…well??

Electrongod on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Shewwtt. I thought “couched” was a lot more interesting.

SlaveDog on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Thank you for your honesty

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Try it some time.

Spliff Menendez on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

this man is a communist, or a marxist, not sure which

I think it’s worse. I think he’s Maoist. Occupy is his attempt to start a “cultural revolution”. He wants to establish a cult of personality.

I would not even put past him to delay an attack on Iran until October to precipitate a response by Iran within the US so he can postpone elections.

Don’t trust this man.

crosspatch on April 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

They can go on State Medicaid, or Dual eligible Medicare part D nitwit

Conservative4ev on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

This is part of the Paul Ryan plan if the dolts would read it. Medicare funds would be pushed to the states who can better spend the money.

Medicare will cover both of these conditions at a cost of 187 billion, or one tenth the cost of Obamacare.

End of story.

itsspideyman on April 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM

Lanceman

on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 PM

Whatever Lance.

Where is my predator?

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM

If you are calling for medicaid expansion that I agree with you. We can expand medicaid to fix most of these issues.

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Then you should be for ending this farce in the Supreme Court and back to reasonable discussions on healthcare.

itsspideyman on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Read my comment.
My genetics suck-yet I’ve never been refused coverage of/due to my conditions.
Not. Once.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Nothing. They are on their own. Who cares if they all die?

Uppereastside on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Were they all dying before?

M240H on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Sell that to the American people.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

A right….
Who is the slave?

How can health-care be a right if it requires someone else to provide it?
What if that person doesn’t want to provide it???

How do you exercise your health-care right when there isn’t anyone around to provide it for you…
Force them…like slaves?

The Founders were geniuses.

Electrongod on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

I just have to say, that pic of Obama is the most arrogant pic of anyone, anywhere, ever.

I DEFY ANYONE to find any other photo of someone with a similar amount of arrogance in their expression.

Paul-Cincy on April 2, 2012 at 10:27 PM

I beg to differ

I can’t stand this one ^^ urgh

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

That’s your plan? “Let them die”?

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 PM

ObamaCare cuts $50 to $100 BILLION a year out of Medicare.

You’re murderers too.

Chuck Schick on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Got your head in the dirt again there Allahpundit?…because you have “seen nothing in O’s comments…”…

No matter how many times we see this movie play out, you guys just don’t WANT to see it.

His comment about there being a “human element” to this…and he hopes they don’t forget that etc….was where he tipped his hand.

I know…I know…I’m just another kook…

Ostrich’s with their head in the sand thinks the One was referring to human suffering without healthcare etc…

Oh no dear don’t want to see the truthers…

He was alluding to another very particular “human element”…namely any of the 5 justices who might vote down his sinister law.

WL on April 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

They can go on State Medicaid, or Dual eligible Medicare part D nitwit

Conservative4ev on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Medicaid has an income requirement. Most middle class families will not qualify.

If you are calling for medicaid expansion that I agree with you. We can expand medicaid to fix most of these issues.

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Not if it is LIS or Dual Eligible,

Conservative4ev on April 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Just for L4L, keninct, and all you other uninformed libtards… here’s a little history for you.

Ever heard of Ezekiel Emanuel? He would be the older brother of Rahm. Yep… The Godfather himself. Ole Zeke was a cochlear implant in O’Dumpster’s head regarding all things Health Care. When O’Bummer talked about red pills and blue pills, he was quoting his mentor. It would be wise to understand something about Zeke’s “Complete Lives System“. Its the foundation for where Libs want to take this country. And make no mistake – they can’t wait to get us there, so we can brag in the year 2030 that the US model of healthcare doesn’t have long lines and shortages of doctors. Will people live healthier lives then? Of course not – its called rationing based on your age.

All you need to know about the “Complete Lives System” is you stop being useful at about age 30. If the curve in that chart doesn’t scare the daylights out of you, maybe the words “medical intervention” should.

THIS is exactly why the entire thing must go down in flames and be replaced. Wake up people.

VietVet_Dave on April 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM

shar61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 PM

You need help ma’am!

Uppereastside on April 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM

You just advocated policies that would do that.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Um, still no.
Fail from failure.

You’re not really learning anything here, are you?

massrighty on April 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

I see you are concerned that your liberal mental illness will not be covered.

climbnjump on April 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Where is my predator?

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM

Your predator?
My Humboldt Squid and Great Hammerheads beg to differ.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Nothing. They are on their own. Who cares if they all die?

Uppereastside on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Or we could pay cash for routine things and carry catastrophic insurance for emergencies. Of course, such a thing is criminal under the penalty of federal law now, but it worked out pretty good for me the first 20 years of adulthood.

Spliff Menendez on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

That question is beyond the scope of the federal government. If you believe that it is the government’s role do something with people with such situations, look to your STATE government. But it is not the role of the government to provide you with a doctor. It is the role of government to create conditions where you can provide for your OWN health care.

crosspatch on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Don’t have to; polls indicate that the American people already know this.

Practice, young Jedi; you may get better.

massrighty on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Aw, that’s adorable.

In fact, the other three provisions of the law as tested in the New York Times/CBS News poll were quite positively received — including the 68% who said they liked the provision that allowed young people to ride on their parents’ health insurance for a longer period of time, and the 85% who liked the provision that health insurance companies cannot turn one away from being insured as a result of pre-existing conditions.

http://pollingmatters.gallup.com/

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Yes, it was leaked. I can’t say how I learned this, but here’s the code that was used.

On Saturday, at a prearranged time and in a public place…

If Kagan pulled on her right ear lobe with her right hand, everything was cool.

If Kagan pulled on her left ear lobe with her left hand, the mandate went down.

If Kagan pulled on her left era lobe with her left hand and then rubbed her nose with her right index finger, the whole shebang went down.

Looks like she gave the left lobe and nose rub signal.

farsighted on April 2, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Thank you for your honesty

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

I would like some too. A question for you. Do you currently have healthcare insurance? Do you or your employer pay for your healthcare insurance?

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Consider, then, this question, posed to Verrilli by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy: “Assume for the moment that this”—the mandate—“is unprecedented, this is a step beyond what our cases have allowed, the affirmative duty to act to go into commerce. If that is so, do you not have a heavy burden of justification?” Every premise of that question was a misperception. The involvement of the federal government in the health-care market is not unprecedented; it dates back nearly fifty years, to the passage of Medicare and Medicaid. The forty million uninsured Americans whose chances for coverage are riding on the outcome of the case are already entered “into commerce,” because others are likely to pay their health-care costs.
Kennedy’s last point, about the “heavy burden” on the government to defend the law, was correct—in 1935.

Toobin just completely sidesteps the only point Kennedy was making – that compelling people to enter into transactions is unprecedented.

No one expects the Justices to be making health-care policy any more than we expect them to be picking Presidents, which, it may be remembered, is not exactly their strength, either.

This is all so completely dumb that I’m having a hard time believing an adult writer in a newspaper is making these statements.

By rejecting Congress’ claim to have the power to force Americans to buy insurance, the justices aren’t “making health-care policy” – they are reminding Congress that they do not have such powers.

Nor did the court pick Bush to be president – he had already won the Florida vote when the court was asked to consider whether Gore was conducting a recount in a fair manner, in which they decided he was not.

I cannot believe people like Toobin are in any position of influence to concoct complete fantasy like this to try and subvert the Constitution. Hopefully all this screeching means that the Court has in fact decided to uphold the Constitution against the manic protestations of Obama and his lackeys in the media.

Seixon on April 2, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Where is my predator?

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM

Here ya go.

Shhh, don’t tell the Prez…but i got it from the Persians.

:o)

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:58 PM

That’s your plan? “Let them die”?

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 PM

Not what he wrote.
Not what he meant.

Nice try, though.

massrighty on April 2, 2012 at 10:49 PM

Thanks for the support. :-)

But it really wasn’t even a nice try on his part.

UltimateBob on April 2, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Nothing. They are on their own. Who cares if they all die?

Uppereastside on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Well…
If they are within my reach…
I will volunteer…with cash or manual labor…as before.
Others do the same when out of my reach..
Will you?

Electrongod on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Where is my predator?

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM

He was never banned. I don’t think, anyway.

Lanceman on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 PM

You’re not really learning anything here, are you?

massrighty on April 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM

I’m certainly learning a lot about the conservative id, that’s for sure.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Lanceman on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 PM

He was banned and then unbanned.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 11:00 PM

My genetics suck-yet I’ve never been refused coverage of/due to my conditions.
Not. Once.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Nothing. They are on their own. Who cares if they all die?

It will kill me but agree with him. Denied by a business med plan or on individual coverage? I sell it..you would be denied..exclusions or premium upped.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:00 PM

http://pollingmatters.gallup.com/

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

And yet people hate Obamacare by double digits and want it repealed.

Chuck Schick on April 2, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Nothing. They are on their own. Who cares if they all die?

Uppereastside on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Upper East Side, huh.

Not surprised, after reading that….

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Plenty of precedent for leaky SCOTUS sessions. Woodward and Armstrong based an entire book on such leaks, The Brethren (although, some of it was based on Woodward’s telepathic interviews with Chief Justice Burger). Richard Davis’ more recent book, Justices and Journalists, calls out those old leakers Frankfurter and Douglas and a few others, and reminds us of the 1992 Newsweek article on the contentious Planned Parenthood v. Casey deliberations which was published long before the opinions were released.

To think that this Administration, of all administrations, doesn’t have a lead on the final judicial fate of the only legislation that mattered to it, on which it squandered the economic recovery of a nation and possibly the President’s re-election hopes, is perhaps a little naive.

de rigueur on April 2, 2012 at 11:01 PM

Practice, young Jedi; you may get better.

massrighty on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Aw, that’s adorable.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Get the spinach off your chin Sparky.

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/22/new-cnn-poll-59-oppose-obamacare/

itsspideyman on April 2, 2012 at 11:01 PM

He was never banned. I don’t think, anyway.

Lanceman on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Never mind.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:02 PM

He was banned and then unbanned.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Yeah, that was it. I forgot.

Lanceman on April 2, 2012 at 11:02 PM

And yet people hate Obamacare by double digits and want it repealed.

Chuck Schick on April 2, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Something tells me this argument won’t be accepted by a majority of this crowd, but I sincerely blame the messaging.

Cheers!

*drink*

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Aviator on April 2, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Yeah, what was that Churchill saying about after 30?

Cleombrotus on April 2, 2012 at 11:02 PM

The “heavy burden” is not on the defenders of the law but on its challengers. Acts of Congress, like the health-care law, are presumed to be constitutional,…

What surprises me about so called “constitutional scholars” like Toobin is they disregard the fact that Congress intentionally passed an act that was blatantly unconstitutional. Toobin, I presume, would be OK with Congress passing a law that everyone’s savings in their bank accounts are to be forfeit to the US Government and it would be presumed to be Constitutional first. Toobin is an idiot.

TulsAmerican on April 2, 2012 at 11:03 PM

Rest assured, if Obama wins reelection and replaces Scalia or Kennedy with a hardcore liberal, the revered principle of judicial deference to Congress will be power-flushed down the toilet once a Republican president and legislature are in office together again.

..ummm..yaaaas..Power-Flushed..I like it.

Thanks, Allah.

The War Planner on April 2, 2012 at 11:03 PM

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Another talking point idiot.

Can you be straight? Nah.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:03 PM

I’m certainly learning a lot about the conservative id, that’s for sure.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 PM

There’s no heroism without sacrifice. Handing other people the bill for your generosity doesn’t make you a saint. It makes you a crook.

Chuck Schick on April 2, 2012 at 11:04 PM

Something tells me this argument won’t be accepted by a majority of this crowd, but I sincerely blame the messaging.

Cheers!

*drink*

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Come in prepared next time

Chuck Schick on April 2, 2012 at 11:05 PM

Allah

Did Barry not have Geitner’s peeps at Goldman leak Boehner’s proposal before the big Econo-Summit in’08?

Basic deduction.

Why today? This message makes more sense for last Friday, or even Thursday night as a press release. Before they voted.

So why wait out the weekend? To hit the Monday news cycle? After they’ve voted?

Kagan doesn’t have any pull, but Breyer and Ginsburg do. They gave Kennedy and Roberts the weekend, came back today to see if any minds had changed, and the word through the grapevine – the clerks – was no. Someone working for Kagan passed that info to Chicago or DC.

And just like Citizens United, 0′s righteous indignation flares up because he believes he is the people are getting screwed by a negative bill o’ rights.

budfox on April 2, 2012 at 11:05 PM

like Toobin is they disregard the fact that Congress intentionally passed an act that was blatantly unconstitutional. T

TulsAmerican on April 2, 2012 at 11:03 PM

Don’t forget that they were LameDuck..

The American people had enough with the lying Democrats and Nancy…
But they had to push it through to give the ball to Obama…

Electrongod on April 2, 2012 at 11:05 PM

“Did the Supreme Court’s initial ObamaCare vote leak to Obama?”

I don’t know.

Kevin M on April 2, 2012 at 11:05 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

I have both-and have NEVER had insurance refuse to cover them.
Next.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 10:38 PM

I’m no liberal, and this is the first time I agree with liberal4life on this blog. However, speaking from experience, if you have a pre-exisiting condition AND you are an independent contractor or self employed (no group program access) YOU COULD NOT GET HEALTH COVERAGE for those conditions! Not in California. My brother who was both, self employed and had no access to group coverage was repeatedly turned down for coverage. Years of trying to get coverage to no avail. But in 2010, California started a pre-exising conditions insurance program and he was able to get coverage. It is NOT cheap, and we didn’t expect it to be. It has high deductibles, but we didn’t expect any thing else. But he does now have coverage.

So when Obamacare gets overturned, and I’m sure that it is unconstitutional, what is the conservative view on people with chronic conditions? At the least, they need to put self employed in the same category as group plans.

JeffVader on April 2, 2012 at 11:07 PM

I’m certainly learning a lot about the conservative id, that’s for sure.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 PM

What I learned about you is that if someone was going to give you $5 but you had to get kicked in the nuts by a bronco in order to get it, but had to pay a $4 fine not to get kicked, then you would be in line to get kicked and calling us all stupid and evil for bitching about the whole deal.

Spliff Menendez on April 2, 2012 at 11:07 PM

I’m certainly learning a lot about the conservative id, that’s for sure.

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:59 PM

I thank you for dropping in so I could learn a lot about stupid Libs. Yay! Hand clap.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:08 PM

Personally I loathe Obama… can’t help it. I cannot even stand to listen to the man speak. I read both of his books in 2008 to see what all the hype was about, got real nervous after the first book, after reading the second I said to my husband ” you have got to read this, this man is a communist, or a marxist, not sure which”..I then immediately volunteered for John McCain’s campaign…his books scared the hell out of me….but I digress.

In regard to Obama’s congress comment, I don’t give a rats ass what the congress unanimously voted on, they do not have the support of the people. In my own humble opinion, the destruction of Obamacare by the Supreme Court would be better than winning the presidency.

shar61 on April 2, 2012 at 10:50 PM

Feel the same way, he appears on the screen; I turn the channel.

I literally loathe the lying Marxist at this point…

litebeam1 on April 2, 2012 at 11:08 PM

JeffVader on April 2, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Thanks for your honest post.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:10 PM

I would like some too. A question for you. Do you currently have healthcare insurance? Do you or your employer pay for your healthcare insurance?

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Liberal4life have an employer? Stop it, you are killing me.

Aviator on April 2, 2012 at 11:10 PM

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:00 PM

I’m within my ideal weight-range, workout daily, and don’t smoke. It all evens out.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 11:10 PM

I literally loathe the lying Marxist at this point…

litebeam1 on April 2, 2012 at 11:08 PM

Many of us would rather be infested with 1,000 Mittenses than listen or look at barrack.

Lanceman on April 2, 2012 at 11:11 PM

I beg to differ

I can’t stand this one ^^ urgh

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Yes that one and the creepy eyes one. Those two pictures are the worst.

gophergirl on April 2, 2012 at 11:11 PM

In all seriousness, I didn’t think this was an effective argument Obama made today. Courts, particularly the Supreme Court, shouldn’t be ruling depending exclusively on what the majority has decided for the minority. I’m very much in favor of the decisions in Lawrence v. Texas and the Prop 8 case, for example. Just because the majority decrees something, that in and of itself shouldn’t be a dispositive argument for that thing’s constitutionality. I didn’t agree with his framing at all. He should have played up the precedent point more (which is still far from open and shut, in my opinion).

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 11:12 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 11:10 PM

So? You didn’t answer my question. We will pretend there is an application in front of us.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:12 PM

I DEFY ANYONE to find any other photo of someone with a similar amount of arrogance in their expression.

Paul-Cincy on April 2, 2012 at 10:27 PM

..does another one of this Royal Toilet-Plunger do it for you, Paul?

That pose (the link above) drives me into paroxysms of rage.

The War Planner on April 2, 2012 at 11:12 PM

Liberal4life have an employer? Stop it, you are killing me.

Aviator on April 2, 2012 at 11:10 PM

That would change everything. Employer paid? No problemo.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:14 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

Same thing we’ve always done with them…nothing. It is not our place to do anything WITH them.

As for doing something FOR them, that is up to the individual. Our founding documents support a right to life, not freedom from death and suffering.

Pattosensei on April 2, 2012 at 11:15 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

What are the millions of affluent and “rich” liberals and Democrats with a lot of disposable income going to do about this? Think maybe they could set up a charitable foundation or something for this purpose? If not, why not?

They might even get some evil affluent or “rich” conservatives and Republicans to help fund it. Imagine that.

Of course, the evil conservatives and Republicans might insist on asking awkward questions of applicants — such as why they did not have health insurance before getting their “pre-existing condition” if they could afford it.

Perhaps it’s best only liberals run such a foundation, as they won’t care about these things as they hand over enough of their disposable income that it hurts, to help their fellow man.

farsighted on April 2, 2012 at 11:15 PM

Is that moron Toobin supposed to be an attorney? Because Justice Kennedy did get it right about Congress’s authority to create the law carrying a heavy burden to show that the law is necessary & proper. For some reason Toobin is trying to pretend that Kennedy was talking about the presumption of constitutionality given to an act of Congress. The two aren’t the same thing & any two-bit lawyer would know that. Well, maybe not one of the Obama Brain Dead Left, but still . . .

Dark Star on April 2, 2012 at 11:17 PM

Yes

carbon_footprint on April 2, 2012 at 10:48 PM

..tangential: hey, old friend, any luck on the hunt? You hanging in there? Hope things are looking up!

The War Planner on April 2, 2012 at 11:17 PM

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:12 PM

I thought it was a statement. I get insurance through my husband’s employer. I’m in better shape-by far-than he is.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 11:18 PM

What do Republicans plan on doing with people with chronic illness and pre-existing conditions?

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

Open up insurance across state lines.

Competition among companies will make them need a wider pool to draw from.

Everyone will offer premium packages to the most desired cline base. That will force other companies to focus on other pools.

States will offer tax credits to chronic/pre-existing and incentives to insurers.

In under five years, we’ll have more people covered than we have today.

How do I know this? Because the left told me when they kept insisting health insurance is just like auto insurance.

If Auto had state dollars underwriting it, the money would go to help cover those with the greatest liabilities – young and old drivers. But people with crappy records would be dumped onto the state because insurers wouldn’t have to compete for the largest pool possible. They could create threshholds and deny everyone else.

Sound familar?

budfox on April 2, 2012 at 11:18 PM

And after this seditious sociopaths performance today, you’re still gonna tell me this guy is “personally likeable”?

Right Mover on April 2, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I get insurance through my husband’s employer. I’m in better shape-by far-than he is.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 11:18 PM

That does not matter. Thank you.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:21 PM

As for doing something FOR them, that is up to the individual. Our founding documents support a right to life, not freedom from death and suffering.

Pattosensei on April 2, 2012 at 11:15 PM

I mean, just to be clear, you support the repeal or striking down of a law that requires insurance companies to provide insurance for people with preexisting conditions. That is, you support allowing insurance companies to drop people with preexisting conditions, and those people will be left to scrape the money together for their treatment, or else die. Do you own that?

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Google insurance actuarial.

Good night.

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:22 PM

The only thing standing between us and communism is the Supreme Court.

I’ve never been so scared for my country in my life.

KMC1 on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 PM

Well, your first sentence is only true if you believe that the whole country will meekly roll over for this abominable usurpation of the Constitution. [Yes, if the SC rules for Obamacare, then the constitution has officially been shredded and overturned, there would be no limits on federal power]. However, I’m not sure that a number of states and citizens are not going to resist this. The Tea Party was the peaceful start of warning the federal government that it has pushed past the boundaries of the Constitution too far. If the Supremes make this usurpation official by allowing Congress to deem what and when it has sufficient authority to command commerce, I don’t believe that those in the Tea Party and elsewhere are going to quietly accept this. I think it will get very ugly, but I also think it will need to get ugly if we are going to stop the slide into totalitarianism.

Your final sentence is spot-on. If the Supremes vote to allow the destruction of our liberty in this manner, I truly fear for the chaos they will unleash.

FRICKIN’ AUTOUPDATE! It ate the initial inputs of this post once again.

AZfederalist on April 2, 2012 at 11:22 PM

bazil9 on April 2, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I’m an Aspie. My brain processes things differently.
*slinks away.*

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 11:23 PM

I’m an Aspie. My brain processes things differently.
*slinks away.*

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Will you shut the hell up with that nonsense?

Lanceman on April 2, 2012 at 11:24 PM

…you’re still gonna tell me this guy is “personally likeable”?

Right Mover on April 2, 2012 at 11:21 PM

You think everyone is completely honest when they are polled by an anonymous nobody over the phone about whether or not they “personally like”, ahem, “The First Black President”?

farsighted on April 2, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Why on earth would Obama bother to publicly berate the Supreme Court prior to the decision unless he already knew the outcome? Nobody in their right mind would give them a smackdown with the fate of a ‘signature achievement’ in the balance. A smart dictator would speak in neutral tones to soften them up. I say there’s a liberal rat with loose lips amongst the newly appointed Justices.

trish333 on April 2, 2012 at 11:32 PM

Will you shut the hell up with that nonsense?

Lanceman on April 2, 2012 at 11:24 PM

What’s the problem? You think she’s lying?

jaime on April 2, 2012 at 11:35 PM

How about this for healthcare,
1. Medicare- members get premium support to purchase private coverage. Support based on income.
2. Medicaid- be expanded to go from absolutely poor to an established state by state income level for members to get premium support based on income.
3. Healthcare available to any and all across all state lines.
4. Allow insurance coverage to be catastrophic only for the less affluent instead of one size fits all like Obamacare.
5.Pre-existing condition patients put in pool like bad risk motorist pool for autos and all ins. companies pay proportional share.
6. Make most basic insurance policies like auto insurance and only cover major medical issues and not routine maintenance items.

OR
we can ditch the entire Constitution and just have the f**king commerce clause and it will allow the liberals to control everything in our lives!

inspectorudy on April 2, 2012 at 11:35 PM

He had no reason to comment otherwise. One could say the oral arguments went poorly but that would not justify the response. He knows the vote is against him.

aniptofar on April 2, 2012 at 11:36 PM

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Ah yes, my fav also. I call it his Il Duce pose.

“The keystone of the Fascist doctrine is its conception of the State, of its essence, its functions, and its aims. For Fascism the State is absolute, individuals and groups relative.”
Benito Mussolini

OkieDoc on April 2, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Every day O’Bozo further demonstrates his own stupidity and the utter fraud of his law degree at Hahvehd. He holds the constitution in contempt — what little he seems to know about it.

He is truly O’Bozo the Clown President.

Jaibones on April 2, 2012 at 11:44 PM

liberal4life on April 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM

LOL. The HotAir punching bag.

Cleombrotus on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 PM

Sometimes I’ve wondered if lobotomy4life is not just Allah in drag, juicing up the entertainment value around here. I mean, this troll in particular is just a vending machine for every libtard cliché there is. Just push any button and the bit torrent of lib-idiocracy just blurts right on out for everyone to laugh at it.

But then I remembered, “you just can’t make some of this stuff up.” I’ve met a few who actually think the way this one does. Sad, really. But still funny.

Harbingeing on April 2, 2012 at 11:45 PM

cjw79 on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Get the spinach off your chin Sparky.

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/22/new-cnn-poll-59-oppose-obamacare/

itsspideyman on April 2, 2012 at 11:01 PM

Hey spideyman, some friendly advice…we already have a HA poster named spinach chin commenting here.

“Hot Dog, they’ll take rabbit!”

Del Dolemonte on April 2, 2012 at 11:45 PM

He had no reason to comment otherwise. One could say the oral arguments went poorly but that would not justify the response. He knows the vote is against him.

aniptofar on April 2, 2012 at 11:36 PM

I pray that your analysis is correct.

AZfederalist on April 2, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4