|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
RhodaA (177 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 12:15 PM Original message |
VA Judge Makes Elementary Error in Health Care Ruling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tcaudilllg (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 12:22 PM Response to Original message |
1. Fallacious thinking'll GETCHA! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elleng (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 12:27 PM Response to Original message |
2. Good. Details: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 12:27 PM Response to Original message |
3. the Insurance companies will be glad to hear that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
area51 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 12:35 PM Response to Reply #3 |
6. +1 n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
obxhead (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 04:05 PM Response to Reply #3 |
19. Very happy to hear that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Scurrilous (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 12:30 PM Response to Original message |
4. Heh. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AC_Mem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 12:30 PM Response to Original message |
5. This is why they will lose on their attempts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PoliticAverse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-15-10 01:19 AM Response to Reply #5 |
24. Regulating health insurance companies? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gratuitous (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 01:08 PM Response to Original message |
7. It's still a very lonesome ruling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alstephenson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 01:15 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. You certainly wouldn't learn that from the MSM. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Abq_Sarah (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 02:02 PM Response to Original message |
9. Talking points, indeed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kelly1mm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:12 PM Response to Original message |
10. If choosing not to purchase something (economic inactivity) can be |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:20 PM Response to Reply #10 |
11. It doesn't need to be valid under the commerce clause. It just has to be valid under the necessary |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kelly1mm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:23 PM Response to Reply #11 |
12. OK, assuming I accept your argument, would a mandate to purchase |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:42 PM Original message |
What regulation would the new car mandate be necessary for? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kelly1mm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:47 PM Response to Original message |
17. To promote the econmic activity in US manufacturing which will |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Frank Booth (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 04:00 PM Response to Reply #17 |
18. Could be. If there were a showing that the requirement is necessary and proper |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kelly1mm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 04:06 PM Response to Reply #18 |
20. OK - thanks for the analysis! Although I do not think congress should |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lfairban (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 10:42 PM Response to Original message |
21. U R A lawyer, right? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Frank Booth (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:42 PM Response to Reply #12 |
16. It would probably depend on the purpose of the legislation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Frank Booth (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:25 PM Response to Reply #11 |
13. That's correct. Good analysis. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kelly1mm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:33 PM Response to Reply #13 |
15. So can the federal government constitutionally mandate the purchase |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tyrone Slothrop (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 03:26 PM Response to Reply #10 |
14. I'm kind of wondering this too |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Toucano (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-14-10 10:45 PM Response to Original message |
22. He's a Dubya appointee. Was there the expectation that he would be smart? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kickysnana (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-15-10 12:18 AM Response to Original message |
23. Meme. Propaganda. Wish we still had balanced news. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu May 02nd 2024, 05:05 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC