Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TideGlider who wrote (136437)	6/28/2012 10:38:05 PM
From: Paul V.	Respond to of 224749

TideGlider, if you will recall the House passed the original care act. Then the House had a change in the party. The Senate had to make a decision to make whether to send the disagreements between the House and the Senate to a conference committee following by the changed portion of the bill going back to the House for ratification of the changes - which was not going to be approved by the new Republican House. Consequently, the Senate outsmarted the House and accepted the House bill as originally proposed by the House by a simple majority. However, the original bill had already passed the Senate and when it came back from the Conference committee all the Senate had to do was to accept the House version, which the Senate did and then forward it to the President for his signature. The interesting thing IMO, was that OBama out smarted the Republicans in all of the steps of passage and todays ruling resulting in his getting the majority of his bill supported by the US Supreme Court. Individuals with pre-exiting condition will be covered, 30 - 40 million additional individuals will be covered by insurance, youth will be covered by insurance until 26 years of age, the medicare part D donut hole will be covered in a couple of years, free annual physical examines will be covered, breast cancer and prostate examines will be covered. And, even some individuals at the poverty level will not have to return the $250 forwarded to them this past year. However, the interpretation does require the cost as a tax. Additionally, the sovereignty of the Federal Government vs State rights and the commerce clause has been protected in my opinion. *Now we tax payers will not have to pay for those individuals who call the EMT's to transport individuals to emergency rooms and the cost for the services which they receive.* My question, "what happens to the requirements for not-for-profits organizations to provide for contraceptions if it is agains their faith. Has any one currently read the full ruling by the Court? Maybe Kenneth has read the ruling of the US Supreme Court.

To: TideGlider who wrote (136437)	6/29/2012 9:37:18 AM
From: locogringo	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

No discussion with you is worthwhile. (re: THUG Paul V) Ain't that the truth. He makes a dumb and erroneous statement. He is proved wrong by several people with facts and links. He returns several days later making the same dopey statement to different people, pretending to be semi- intelligent. Even his best buddy, kenny_troll has zero contact with him and answers no posts. I stand by my conclusion that he is the dumbest person on the planet.