I saw this summary which was helpful to me
Grace & Peace
PLW
Jan 31, 2011
Health Care or No Health Care, That is the Question
It seems like the Obama administration thinks that their nationallized health care is legit, showing little regard to what the federal appointed judges think about his law based on this latest ruling in Florida. (ironically, they showed an about-face when an Arizona lawsought to enforce an already existing federal immigration law, but I digress).
I saw this summary which was helpful to me
I saw this summary which was helpful to me
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"A random discourse on various events...
ReplyDelete...in an effort to bring information and clarity...
...along with a free exchange of ideas."
It's with no small degree of irony that one of the shortest posts is the most informative.
WAKE UP, MR. PRESIDENT
It's a remarkable stroke of luck in this instance that the judges who decided correctly share the author's viewpoint. Both of the judges who ruled the law wholly or partly in violation of the constitution have their reasons, of course, but why should those matter? Just as long as they come down on the correct side of the question. The two judges who ruled against the plaintiffs are obviously judicial activists and clearly unfit for the bench.
But it's really President Obama who has his head in the clouds. For even though an equal number of federal judges have upheld the measure as have opposed it, he lacks the vision to see his Administration's errant ways. Then again, does this 'tie' really matter? If fifteen federal judges ruled in favor of the Act and one dissented, wouldn't the Administration be guilty of not seeing what is so plain to the author -- namely, that this 'nationalization' of health care is in violation of the constitution?
"...information and clarity..."
No reason is given, of course, for such wisdom. I suppose it might be because the lesser among us wouldn't comprehend it if it were revealed unto us. Why should anyone doubt the clarity of this graphic? Isn't it plainly obvious? There is it! Right there! Judge Vinson has made his ruling. There is little room (or need) for reason in the national discourse.
And that lack of reason cuts both ways:
What are you for?
I'm for change!
Real change?
Yes. Change you can believe in.
Wow! You got my vote!
God bless you.
Might makes right. The end justifies the means. If I do it, it can't be wrong.
I guess that's what we get for electing a Retarded Queer Foreign Communist Muslim president.
I hereby retire from blog participation.
While I am opposed to your anti-blog participation sentiment, I am in agreement to your opposition to the way in which this was presented. I was simply trying to make light of the fact that if there is SO much controversy about the legitimacy of this health-care bill, why was it approved in the first place? I find it incredibly wasteful that we have a system which creates ambiguity so that federal judges can weigh in, bringing it ultimately back to DC where the law was initiated, only to waste millions of dollars to determine if it is legitimate by the Supreme Court. Why not just start there in the first place? Seems logical to me.
ReplyDeleteThe fundamental question is this:
ReplyDeleteThink of your family members, friends and your fellow American Citizens, and ask yourself this: Do you think health care is a privilege, or a right?
Although I think Obama's plan is full of areas to fix, as a citizen of the wealthiest country in the world, I believe it should be a right. It's a shame to let a fellow citizen be denied health care for a pre-existing condition, or drop a college grad who can't find a job from their parents plan. Once a friend or family member finds themselves in that situation, you might change your mind.
Bottom line is this: Something needs to be done. Parties need to stop bickering and find a solution. And I'll say this as a true independent voter who has always believed that neither party has your best interests at heart.
-BB
You're going to make an excellent pastor.
ReplyDelete