Good name, Contempt...that's what I have for your position. You and Scalia don't get to decide that for everyone, thankfully.

I do contempt you!

ContemptMe... still waiting for a health plan from the GOP that doesn't tell people to go die since they can only buy what the vouchers will pay for (by the way... they are not indexed to inflation... but guess what?...... the plan the legislators have is?....)

Simple health care plan, just let us have the same gold plated plan and pension plan that they have..... won't happen.... but then why would the GOP need a health plan or Pension plan when they all go on to Fox News?

Scalia is such a hypocrite. In the vast majority of cases where the legislature votes on a law, he upholds that law.

This time he didn't. Hmmm, wonder why.

Also, just because, in his mind, the individual mandate was unconstitutional, the entire law was unconstitutional?? That's ridiculous.

He's become an utter partisan, which has no place on the Supreme Court. He's one of the main reasons the court's ratings are dismal.

Kevin Bitz

still waiting for a health plan from the GOP that doesn't tell people to go die

If you listen only to Progressives and Liberals, you will never hear the whole truth!

Contempt you? Yes I do, just as much as you show contempt for the poor and sick in this country. Nothing but contempt for you and your like.

DB Akron,

I don't believe you saying that he doesn't know the whole truth answered his question of where their healthcare plan is. I still to this day have not seen a conservative comprehensive healthcare plan that isn't built like Swiss Cheese. If you think giving someone a voucher for $400 worth of HC is going to match up then put it out there and see what kind of feedback you get. I truly believe the GOP is aiming to not have to put anything out there and they'll indicate that the government shouldn't be involved meaning that we're on our own (rich staying rich).

lol - you internet message board "rich guys" crack me up, Contempt. You must be so busy being well-educated and successful that you missed the very clear data that supports that once Americans understand the benefit to be gained from the Affordable Care Act, they are overwhelmingly in favor of it. ;)

Scalia referenced "hog" or "hogs" several times during his rant. While He is by nature, the best definition of a legal bastard, He remains appropriate to His porcine nature.

Contempt Me - So if you grew up in abject poverty, my guess is that you used the public school system and the public health system as well. Now you are succesful, but your kind is the first to want to take away any safety net from others who are living in an impoverished state. Your employees must all be your kids and other relatives.

Prove it A.s.s.hole! I don't believe one word of that lie. Hollow claims by a racist, idiot troll like you mean nothing over here. We know you jerks don't care about facts. So we don't expect any from you. So why don't you just slither your creepy, slimy self back over to your Fox snake hole where you belong. Funny how progressives and liberals wouldn't be caught dead in the demon infested swamp pit called FoxNews (your habitat of choice). But you all just can't resist infesting our conversations with your putrid presence. And BTW. We also know the RNC & right wing PACs pay goofballs like you precisely to troll our conversations.

Take comfort that you are well represented by the likes of Antonin Scalia on the low court these days. He shares your poison.

Give me a FACT, How is the Government going to pay for this AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE? By a Voucher?

I see that not only the Republican politicians cannot be told they are wrong but the Republican justices of the SCOTUS cannot stand being wrong either.

I grew up in abject poverty and became well educated and a very successful multiple business entrepreneur with VERY HAPPY and VERY SPOILED employees who never resign

Why do I have a problem swallowing that?? I grew up with nothing to eat and I'm now the owner of a chain of restaurants. I never had two pennies to rub together but now I own twenty banks. Get my drift?

@ Contemptme:

I repeat my challenge to you. PROVE IT! It shouldn't be hard if you really did what you said. But we know you are lying through your teeth. So it's just throwing more spitballs. Which is obviously all you know how to do. You laid it out there. Bragging about something you didn't do.

So, contemptme, tell me something. As a business owner who appears to provide healthcare coverage to their employees you are content with doing nothing and absorbing 15% year over year increases under the current structure we have? My guess is no.

My guess is you are overstating your accomplishments if you insist you are a business owner that is okay with the current structure of our healthcare system.

As someone who has worked in the Human Resource field for 17 years, I can assure you that for the last 7 or 8 years, companies were being choked by the increases in their healthcare costs. Something had to be done in order to help curtail rising costs.

ContemptMe:

RE: your post #1.10

Your employees may very well love you, but not as much as you love YOURSELF! Congratulations on being so very benevolent and loving, how thoughtful and Contemptable!

Scalia? When did he fall out the Dick Cheney's pocket? Must be during the heart transplant surgery.

Justice Scalia hates that the ACA was upheld for two sustantial reasons. First, he is beyond arrogant and thinks he is the only person with a rational thought on the nine judge panel. Second, his wife is retained by the health insurance industry, as a lobyist, and the upholding of ACA will undoubtably cost her some big bucks for her failure to influence the court enough to repeal ACA! I say GREAT that this compasionate law was upheld! It WILL SAVE LIVES!

Sign of SENILE is taking the toll. (Life time tenure)

@ContemptMe:

C'mon big boy! Prove It! You said it. Stop trying to hide behind your BS now that you have been called out by many on this thread. Can't take the heat, eh? Easy to sit on your lazy a.s.s at the height of any CEO's working hours and just bash President Obama isn't it.? That's one of the reasons it was so easy to call out your lies. Now Prove your BS claim or STFU you lying troll.

My god! So many libs on here during the day! I work overnight-I'm assuming all the libs do to? Or is it that you don't work at all?

ContemptMe...

You guys are a real trip............sad....really sad....and clueless........think about 11/2/10 then think about 11/6/12 and ask yourself what's different?

What is different? Nothing, and that is the sad thing. The Republicans came into office and did nothing for 2 years. Your right, people won't forget. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

Obama/Biden 2012!!

Why can't that partisan hack of a justice just retire already? What a fricken tool.

@ContemptMe:

So predictable. I thought this cowardly, juvenile rat would take the last refuge of his weak mind. Copying! Good try Goofy. Can't take the heat huh? You made the claim. You bare the proof idiot. Prove to us you are not lying. Otherwise go away and leave us alone. After your predictable closing insult, you have my permission to stop talking to me now Junior. Because I wouldn't give an unstable psycho like you a d.a.m.n thing! Bye Bye!

"There is no right to privacy - no generalized right to privacy," Scalia said.

The Libertarians should be up in arms over that one.

I have experience in the very difficult area of healthcare and I see both sides here (but not the over the top rhetoric from both).

I have 4 folks in my family with a chronic disease, and the costs ALWAYS top $12,000.00 a year out of pocket. My employer pays a portion of my family policy, but I still pay over $700.00 a month to cover the 6 in my family. Part of the reason is that my employer went to a sliding scale where those that earn more, pay more. I don't like the fact that my costs keep going up, but coverage keeps declining, but what scares me more is the spreadsheets that HR is doing comparing dropping plans versus keeping them since that is now an option.

I don't have a college educatation, but I'm widely read, and work very hard. I have gotten 2 of my kids through college with 2 still to follow. I earn enough that I get no breaks on anything, but when you take into account that I receive no breaks, I actually take home less than people earning 2/3 of my gross.

It's getting critical and I can't keep paying for those that can't (and in a minority of cases won't), and not receive some of the same breaks everyone else gets. Or put another way, EVERYBODY needs to pay a little more, because those of this in the UPPER MIDDLE can't foot the bill for either end of the scale much longer.

The Affodability Act had some good points (portability, no denial of pre-existing conditions, and extended coverage ages). But it has resulted in preemptive increases, and the day after the ruling, it was predicted that the next two-years will see significant increases since those that are healthy will see premiums increase to the level of those less well (50 year old smokers will pay the same as 25 year old healthy person). This is so that the company's can level the pricing versus expected payment outflow.

This will be a travesty both financially and from a heath care perspective, because it is a poorly designed plans and like all entitlements and taxes, once in place it only grows. This will not lower costs and about 80% of the physicians within 20 years of retirement have said if implemented as written, this will affect their retirement plans. Not people like Brain Surgeons, or highly specialized physicians, but Family Practitioners and OB/GYN's. If you think this is an exaggeration, look at the declining numbers of OB's since Tort Reform was defeated in the mid-nineties.

My wife is 27 year R.N., and she has worked in the E.R. for the past 13 years. She's transferring because reimbursements are expected to decline, and they are already overloaded from a patient load perspective.

The fact is that this isn't going help. It's poorly written, and even more poorly executed (so far). I don't think even the hardest core right-winger opposes competition for insurance and drug companies. I don't think that they even think that there shouldn't be a safety net. What people don't want is an unlimited, unfunded, and not paid for by all citizens. Everybody needs to contribute something. Otherwise, some of us will find this the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Greg, thanks for an informed response. I agree, the law should be starting at controlling the cost of care. It has, instead, just increased the benefits that are required with no regard to cost. I suggest people look at the cost of Lasek surgery, which is not generally covered by insurance, and see how the cost of this has dropped dramatically since first introduced. When people had to pay, they looked for the best deal and the market responded. If we just give people insurance, there is nothing to push the providers to hold down costs. I'm not suggesting that providing insurance for everyone is bad, but we have to treat the disease, not just the symptoms.

"contempt me" is a paid rich-piglican troll.....what a waste of human DNA.

"What can he do to me? Or to any of us?" Scalia said. "We have life tenure and we have it precisely so that we will not be influenced by politics, by threats from anybody."

He was asked "why you push people's buttons every once in a while." Scalia said, "It's fun to push the buttons."

Most unseemly for a Supreme Court Justice. Glad to know Scalia understands the game - while his life tenure protects him from political influence....he makes clear what his political views are...while his bravado is out pushing buttons. Arrogance. Pure, unadulterated arrogance.

They should have term limits. The "forever" rule was set up back when life expectancy was 40 years tops.

When a person registers here and then goes on to post a litany of diatribes & contentious & aggressive replies it only proves the

IMMATURITY OF THE NEWBEE

a lack of self control

a superiority complex, thinking that HIS INSIGHT will change one single mind

and

more time on their hands than the unemployed .

SO, CONTEMPT, why were you BANNED AT FOX...?

...

I was impressed with the interview of Scalia. If you haven't watched it, you should. Having an open mind can be enlightening.

My first impression is that he is a very intelligent guy, one of those uber-intelligent, difficult to be around kind of guys. I have one friend who has a similar communication style and his IQ is off the charts. He is wildly successful, but can be a real feminine-wash.

I think Scalia is right about the right to privacy, and I appreciate his differentiating the way conservatives look at the text vs liberals. He was obviously more supportive of the original meaning, not fanatically, but with reason, but he also said that he has marveled at great jurists writing an opinion with which he might disagree with, but that beat his own argument. And he admitted to writing applesauce himself at times and admitted changing his mind once he wrote, as he would discover through the writing that his own position would not stand up to the writing of it.

This is the mind of a great jurist, a guy willing to admit when he is wrong, a guy willing to admire his adversaries.

Rather than spewing hate and calling names, those who do not like the guy should take 20 minutes and watch the interview. Even the most strident liberal should be able to appreciate a good mind.

I know that I have found people of wisdom and understanding on both sides of many important ideas. As a moderate-libertarian leaning conservative, I am finding more wrong with the 2 party's edges, and the need for a vibrant moderate 3rd party.

short fat trouble maker. give him a bottle of scotch maybe he will go away

I would think a right to privacy would be considered intrinsic to a right to Freedom. Also the idea that we should have the same ethical considerations for what can be called cruel and unusual as Americans who lived over 200 years ago is kind of frightening - you know, the kind of folk who would sit around and throw a picnic while someone strangled to death in a noose.

I rather think we should look to our own consciences.

Justice Scalia is expressing his oppinion just as everyone else has the right to do under the 1st admendment. I give the man credit for standing up for his principles and his beliefs. At least he does stand up for his beliefs unlike Roberts who ducked for cover When Obama threw out his threat to the Supreme court, which by the way should have been considered TREASON if one follows the Constitution.

To..LEFT""""

Too funny....

But Scalia didn't stand up for his beliefs. Look at his record. Whenever the legislature votes for a law, he upholds it.

Not here...because he's a hypocrite.

Bart as you well know "Lefistreporting" doesn't have the facts on his side so he's pounding the table. And throwing out big words like Treason...

But Scalia didn't stand up for his beliefs. Look at his record. Whenever the legislature votes for a law, he upholds it.

Not here...because he's a hypocrite.

Hypocrisy?? Serious?? His job is to look at each case based on it's merits - not rule on some sort of formula. Who needs judges if all they are supposed to do is uphold legislation?

So lets see Justice Scalia argues that the Obama administrations whole argument in this area, the penalty was not a tax but a penalty, but Justice Robert's can only find that to make this whole thing the affordable Health Care Act legal buy making the people have to buy it is to make the penalty a tax, but now President Obama is still stating it is not a tax Right but a penalty. By right the Supreme Court should overturn their own decision if it is not a tax, but a penalty then forcing people to by health insurance is illegal.

@leftistreporting.

What a daffy D.i.c.k. you are. It's free speech with Scalia. But treason with President Obama in your sick twisted, demonic world. If Obama truly was the dictator you all lie about on the right, the entirety of the Republican Party and its Neo Confederate base would have been bought up on treason charges years ago. Like for example; attacking the President while he was on foreign soil. You have no idea what constitutes "Treason". Or you wouldn't say something so blatantly stupid. You're likely just a "C" student idiot, camped out on Blogs spewing hatred behind the safety of anonymity.

You people are genuinely crazy. You have created a climate of hatred and intolerance so thick, that it is doubtful the country can become normal without some kind of violent confrontation between the left and right. The Center to left is unlikely to ever accept a President from the far right again because of the horrendous way you have treated President Obama.

There really is no way the GOP will defeat President Obama fairly in 2012. And it knows it! That's why Republicans are furiously rigging election standards with illegal, racist "Jim Crow" voter ID laws to eliminate minority and youth voters. As a result, the 2012 election will likely come down to another choice by Scalia and the band of conservative thieves on the Supreme Court. And we know how that one will go. Now that is much closer to Treason you idiot.

How is it hypocritical to uphold laws based on their constitutionality?

It matters not whether it's called a penalty or a tax. If you listen to the right wing nuts, they make claims that they are being penalized by having to pay a tax on their hard earned income. Where is the difference here in the ruling of the SCOTUS on the real meaning of those that refuse to buy insurance having to pay a penalty/tax for not doing so. They should have just pass a law that anyone without health coverage would only get coverage they could pay for in advance of treatment. That's really what health insurance amounts to...prepay medical treatment.

I'm getting tired of covering deadbeat people like that through higher insurance premiums. They pay their fair share for insurance and my premiums will come down. No money...no doctor. Fair enough??

Now as far as this judge Scalia going on the air waves stating his opinion...that to my knowledge has never happened before where a judge on the losing end of an argument went before the public and embarrassed the court. He should be impeached for disrespecting his other member of the court alone with Thomas who was extremely biased in his opinion even before the case went before the Supreme Court. By Thomas not excusing himself he showed that he is not worthy of being on the SCOTUS and should be impeached.

Actually since the appointment of Scalia to the Supreme Court, it has become a joke. It seems like it has become a party line vote on issues without any regard for the Constitution.

Well put, James. Scalia needs to save his opinions for his written rulings and just do his damn job. I don't always agree with the other justices' rulings, but I respect the fact that they don't feed the media circus and bask in the attention. One would think wearing the mantle of "Supreme Court Justice" should require a modicum of dignity and self-restraint, not partisan demagoguery.

Activist judge... I guess it's OK if he agrees with your position.

The appointments of the Justices to the supreme court have always been political.The make up of it has always depended on which party has the voting power and when we have the make up that we have now,we are left to hope that their integrity will overcome their politics. of course ,when the majority are Liberals,then the Conservatives have the same complaint. We don't have a lot of hope,as Liberals,that the make up will swing back to our points of view too often.I was pleasantly surprised at the passing of the Health Care Reform,but I don't expect it to survive long enough to be improved,by needed amendments. The Super-Rich and their Lackeys are determined to throw us back into Pre-Ninteen forty six We see this continually.They have accomplished most of this already ,with their successful destruction of employment. Their attacks on Unions, although too many citizens don't seem to realise that they ,themselves have always had Unions. A rose by any other name----. It has taken us,We the workers, an inordinately long time to gain our just deserts. We have not had it for long,but I am afraid that it will be a long time before our time returns!.

JOHNNY

The way Obama was treated? Are you @!$%#ing crazy? No president in history was as maligned or abused as President Bush. The losers on the left made a living bashing him on a daily basis. You are a typical libturd no memory and create your own "facts" when reality doesn't support your ideas.

It is time for Scalia to shut up and either retire or be impeached. He has no business going public with his thoughts and opinions. Typical fat, bigoted GOP pig.

Bubba is right - the ENTIRE argument, by the Administration, was that the "individual mandate" was authorized under the Commerce Clause. NOBODY on the Court agreed. The whole "sale", by the Administration, was that the penalty was NOT a "tax", however, 5 members of the SCOTUS had to hold it to be a "tax" in order to uphold the law, meaning that the President has imposed the biggest tax increase in the history of the Republic (and not just on those making over $250K). In so doing, the Court was doing its job. However, one must now ask if the President is going to own up to the result?

One doubts it.

Justice Scalia has every right to express his desire to return the nation to 1787 when the Constitution was written and signed. In that halycon year, every citizen had the God-given right to die young of any damned disease or malady upon which they may have stumbled.

In those days to which Scalia yeans to return, women and slaves were property, incapable of any thought processes, and machine guns would be necessary for citizens to respond to militia duty.

They also never contemplated the Supreme Court being able to declare a law unconstitutional until Justice Marshall invented the concept of judicial review in Marbury vs Madison in 1803.

... so it follows that in the absence of any mention of judicial review in the Constitution, Justice Scalia would be repelled by any ruling declaring a law unconstitutional, and would have never joined any decision which did.

Thank goodness for True Believers of the US Constitution - like Justice Scalia.

oldefarte,

You need to do your homework. Very very few people wil end up paying this Tax/Penalty.

Lets assume for a moment the insurance industry currently takes in ten
dollars in premiums and pays out five dollars in healthcare claims. The new law
requires them to pay out 8 dollars in claims on every ten dollars they take
in.

The law gives them 30,000,000 new paying customers. Their revenues are going
to go up, way up. In order to comply with the 80% rule they will have to bring
all premiums DOWN. Why? because nothing has changed the number and amount of
healthcare claims or their relative cost. And since those who were freelaoders
in the past will now be paying the overall cost of care itself should stabilize
or also go down.

ACA will reduce healthcare cost slowly and it will reduce health Insurance
costs significantly, and soon, as its provisions are implemented.

Now ask yourself why the Republicans in Congress don't seem to understand
this, want to kill the law, deny Americans healthcare savings, and are willing
to LIE thru their teeth to defeat this legislation?

@msnotsi:

Takes one to know one D'Bag. Fact; After 9/11 President Bush enjoyed a 94% approval rating as the entire country rallied around him. And this was even after the fact that they knew he wasn't legally elected. He lost, but was appointed by your boys Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas in their infamous Bush v. Gore decision. That was the genesis of the hostility toward Bush from the left. Of course he and Cheney quickly squandered the high approval rating by lying us into the Iraq War. And driving the entire country over the cliff into an Economic Abyss that President Obama had to quickly get us out of!

So you tell me again idiot. What was the right's reason for hating and impeaching Bill Clinton? What's the source of it's naked racism and hatred of President Obama?

All you racist, Confederate, secessionist, TeaBag Republicans have done since Obama was elected has been to corrode and undermine the elected US government. You dopes have held the nation and world hostage with your virulent hatred of our President and your petulant vendetta. You brought the entire world to the brink of collapse with your reckless & suicidal Debt ceiling gambit. You have done absolutely nothing to fix the mess you created. All you have done 24/7 through your Fox News hate orgy, Hate ConservaPACs, Hate talk Radio, Hate Christian Right nuts and retarded right wing politicians, is call President Obama "N.....", unAmerican, Muslim terrorist and every vile thing imaginable for 4 years. Then you get p.i.ss.ed when Progressives call out your corrosive BS. Yet you expect Progressives to just sit back and accept your "evil hatred agenda". And recognize your leaders. Good luck with that Bozo!

We'll do that when you recognize the authority of ours, as the Constitution requires. Now slither back to your FoxNews hate hole with the rest of your poisonous snakes.

And I fully agree that a Supreme Court Justice has NO BUSINESS shucking his point of view on the street corner like some snake oil salesman. If anything he should protect his personal opinions even more than any average citizen because he has a solumn duty to impartially judge each case on its merits.

@JohnnyB-433715 Well Said and worth repeating (with your permission) to these bumbling RWNJ morons.

@msnotsi:

Takes one to know one D'Bag. Fact; After 9/11 President Bush enjoyed a 94% approval rating as the entire country rallied around him. And this was even after the fact that they knew he wasn't legally elected. He lost, but was appointed by your boys Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas in their infamous Bush v. Gore decision. That was the genesis of the hostility toward Bush from the left. Of course he and Cheney quickly squandered the high approval rating by lying us into the Iraq War. And driving the entire country over the cliff into an Economic Abyss that President Obama had to quickly get us out of!

So you tell me again idiot. What was the right's reason for hating and impeaching Bill Clinton? What's the source of it's naked racism and hatred of President Obama?

All you racist, Confederate, secessionist, TeaBag Republicans have done since Obama was elected has been to corrode and undermine the elected US government. You dopes have held the nation and world hostage with your virulent hatred of our President and your petulant vendetta. You brought the entire world to the brink of collapse with your reckless & suicidal Debt ceiling gambit. You have done absolutely nothing to fix the mess you created. All you have done 24/7 through your Fox News hate orgy, Hate ConservaPACs, Hate talk Radio, Hate Christian Right nuts and retarded right wing politicians, is call President Obama "N.....", unAmerican, Muslim terrorist and every vile thing imaginable for 4 years. Then you get p.i.ss.ed when Progressives call out your corrosive BS. Yet you expect Progressives to just sit back and accept your "evil hatred agenda". And recognize your leaders. Good luck with that Bozo!

We'll do that when you recognize the authority of ours, as the Constitution requires. Now slither back to your FoxNews hate hole with the rest of your poisonous snakes.

To..msnotsi..."""

BS...bush was given a pass by the media that's why he got away with what he did ...you couldn't question his motives ...you were unAmerican if you did ...remember

Dear James - Today, Blue Cross/Blue Shield applied for a 9 1/2% retroactive increase in premiums to finance its increased obligations under Obamacare. I will have to pay that - or risk a penalty - or someone will have to pay that or risk a penalty on my behalf (leaving them poorer when it comes to negotiating my pay). Now, you can call that a "penalty" or whatever you want and you can swear that 80% of it will go to cover "claims costs" but the reality is that my "taxes" just went up $44/mos. ($528/year) and the law is not even fully in place. When it does become fully effective, expect an even greater "adjustment".

Meanwhile, those healthcare "freeloaders" are chiefly going to be those who are too poor to buy health insurance, so someone (most likely the taxpayer) is going to have to pay for their premiums, too. You can add that to the $528 in increased taxes this is already going to cost me - 'cause, trust me, it ain't the "trust fund millionaires" who are jackin' up the cost of Medicaid, so who is going to actually pay for the increased premiums on these increased number of insureds? We can only "monetize" debt so long before we turn into Weimar Germany (and inflation, of course, is simply a "hidden tax", meaning I take it in the shorts no matter what).

And, while you are at it, how about a little self-education on the law of supply and demand? Per you, the insurance companies just picked up an additional 30 Million "paying customers". Where are the additional 100,000 doctors who will be necessary to provide services to those additional "paying customers" (if we are to maintain the current ratio)? If the avocado crop is poor, I pay more for avocadoes. If there is a shortage of doctors, the same economies are going to apply and guess who absorbs that cost.

I have several doctor friends and acquaintances who have been "tapped" by the Chinese government to help them expand their healthcare system. The way they did it was to start increasing the number of doctors and clinics and upgrading health delivery systems, which is the only logical and workable way to do it. More docs= more care, without inflation. In the USA, however, we have somehow decided that all you need to fix a problem is a law that says "fix the problem", but all we've done is to assure that prices will now rise to accommodate the additional demand and, as docs charge more, so will the insurance companies (and, since that 80% rule is basically a "cost-plus" contract, you can expect that there will be no incentive for cost containment).

So, you think I should "educate myself"? LOL. You haven't got a clue...

Scalia's a Greaseball, who cares....Executive branch: BOUGHT, Legislative branch: BOUGHT, Judicial branch: BOUGHT....the constitution is now null and void due to the coruption and bribery of the three branches of the US Government of and by themselves. What "We the People"? We now have the best government money can buy!!

oldefarte

Too many people see this as the 'answer' to the rising costs. When everyone is holding a health insurance policy and cannot find a Dr. to see them, maybe it will hit them.

Scalia - a proponent of the idea that the Constitution must be interpreted using the meaning of its text at the time it was written

And he is the only one that can do that - so he thinks.

The right to keep and bear arms was because nobody wanted a standing Federal Army but thought it better to have individual militias and they needed to be armed for that purpose, hunting and protection. The thought was if you are free why do you need an army to impose on you.

I guess Scalia overlooked that in the original thought. I wonder if he would allow you to visit the government buildings, including his office armed.

Tut, tut little children, play nice. Scalia is a conservative so of course liberals will hate him, they can't help themselves. What he says from this point on is moot since Roberts essentially gave away the store. Enjoy your new and 'healthier' world, seems there's going to be a problem finding enough doctors to treat all the new patients, perhaps a law can be passed to cover that as well?

Now we see how a supreme court justice becomes a political hack. No wonder Bush won the recount, what a shame!!

there's going to be a problem finding enough doctors to treat all the new patients, perhaps a law can be passed to cover that as well?

The ratio of doctors to people in America was getting lower before AHA and was projected to be even lower in 10 years, with additional people getting health care the problem will be exacerbated.

Yes a law can be passed to increase doctors as well. Free medical school to those that qualify! I had rather my tax dollars go toward educating doctors than invasion and conquering programs. Since Cuba found out how to provide care for its people maybe America should ask how.

@Dick - "The right to keep and bear arms was because nobody wanted a standing Federal Army but thought it better to have individual militias and they needed to be armed for that purpose, hunting and protection. The thought was if you are free why do you need an army to impose on you."

First off, the 2nd amendment giving the citizens a right to bear and keep arms was in part to prevent a monarchy from taking hold in the country again. To quell any possible military take overs or Coups. That amendment also allows the citizens the right to "replace the government" if the government becomes too inept, too corrupt, and too power grabbing from what the real seat of the government is supposed to be, "THE PEOPLE". The forefathers when they founded the country with the ideals that "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL", and the government "OF, BY, AND FOR THE PEOPLE", would not be and should not be manipulated by external forces like we see today. BANKS, CORPORATIONS, PACs, SuperPACs, SPECIAL INTERESTS, LOBBYISTS, ect. What we have today is 99% of the People are poor and are being ruled by a 1% Monarchy of the rich.

We are all, as voters, as citizens, responsible for what our government has become. George Washington warned the country then, and his immortal words speak to us now, "Political Parties serve no other purpose than to divide what we have fought, bled, and died for." But we are too damned self consumed, too preoccupied with buying into lies, smoke and mirrors, and conned into exercising our COMMON SENSE - a term coined from an Aptly named publication by Thomas Payne and Benjamin Rush, to even care. If we even bothered to know and understand our history and our heritage as Americans (not to be confused by all that hyphanated race tag bullsht) we would know the very same problems exist today as they did when we succeeded from the British Monarchy. But our national heritage is being bred out of us, by the elitism we see within our corrupted officials.

"When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, 'This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know,' the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything—you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
—Robert A. Heinlein, If This Goes On, 1940

Think about what we DO NOT KNOW about what goes on with those we ELECT. Or the selfish motives the candidate has that enters the halls of congress a middle classed person, only 4 years later to be a multi-millionaire, on a salary that would take a lifetime to achieve those millions. Consider these things before you subscribe to the (R) or (D) mentality when you take to the polls in November.

Oldefarte, Does it occur to you that the Insurance industry is sending you a message designed to get you to vote against ACA? Does it occur to you that the Healthcare Industry is jacking their prices up to send the same message? Do you understand that all 30,000,000 of new customers are ALREADY in the system and getting their healthcare somehow somewhere--afterall you can't live without it but they don't have insurance at all! And a lot of them are going to the emergency ward and getting all of us to pay for it in the form of increased costs? Does the delta between paying out 50% of collected premiums or 80% of collected premiums mean anything to you? It should because that delta is potentially billions of dollars in our favor and if properly monitored and enforce it will reduce your premiums. The important thing about ACA is that it gives the American People a chance to get some control over these insanely ever increasing costs. And oH I can hear those healthcre industry piggy screaming no, someone is finally going to be looking into their flagrant mismanagement and outrageous GREED.

How can France deliver the #1 ranked healthcare in the world spending only 11% of GDP to do so when we spend 19% of GDP and are ranked #37th? It seems to me the USA has a lot of room for improvement. Potentially we could rank #1 or #2 and reduce our outlay by 8% of GDP. That would be a huge benefit to every business and individual in America. The fact is that the Healthcare Industry has been operating in America with the idea that someone has given them a blank check. The result is obvious, they are inefficient and wasteful in every regard. They sell this ruse to Americans as "freedom" and "choice" while terrifying the public with crap claims like "dead Panels" etc.

The current Healthcare Industry is bankrupting America, what would you propose to do about it, just keep paying through the nose?

Sorry oldfarte, I tried to correct the typos but the system wouldn't let me. But you get my drift.

• Antonin Scalia -- you LOST. Get OVER it.

"At least he does stand up for his beliefs"

• That's not necessarily a positive quality. It's also what you believe that matters -- a WHOLE LOT. After all --- Hitler stood up for his beliefs.

Now we know where the leaks came from...

Solutions 539: responding to response of @msnotsi:

Anyone who can take a bozo'z head off with a keyboard like that is impressive to say the least. Well met and Nicely done!

@ Solutions - Oh, you mean like the left's descriptions of Bush for 8 years?

There are several issues in this article, the first about "The Justices and Decorum Outside the Courtroom" is an article by the NY Times about the SCOTUS Justices attending the State of the Union, conflict of interest including spouses who are activists, and sexual harassment scandals (Justice Thomas). At the minimum, any person representing the government should conduct themselves in a professional manner, and the higher the office the higher the standards.

In regard to health care, Romney's visits to the UK and Israel, which are both democratic allies with universal health care, was FAR more interesting than rehashing the ACA ruling. The Brits love their health care, and Israel's cost per GDP is 10 percentage points lower than the US. What does it take for Rightwingers to get a clue that universal healthcare is a good thing?!

Gun control comments by Scalia was more interesting than ACA as well. Rightwingers should take heed. In view of modern weaponry, interpretation of the Constitution becomes tricky. If common citizens, or even militias were to fight tyranny, even automatic weapons and 100 round clips are nothing compared to our military might. This reasoning may no longer apply folks...

Scalia- CRAWL back to your hole,You're not Needed ,Wanna to Scream tantrum! -crawl in your Dark-Hole and forget to get a stone to cover.

Correction "Don't Forget" If not, may drown you there,when it's raining !lol

@ Larry-2260635,

To think your health insurance premium would be lower if everyone had insurance is ludicrous. Insurance companies are right now trying to figure out how to raise the amount of money they pay out for your health insurance so they can raise your premiums; after all they get to keep 20% of any amount collected.

Anyone who is such a blazing partizan has no business being a Judge of anything.

So Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayor and the 'other' liberal guaranteed to vote liberal, need to go? Or are the liberal justices who vote liberal across the board ok? Hmmm, whatever happened to making decisions based on Constitutionality rather than party rhetoric?

Replying to Greg Slep post--If your wife is an RN in any city with population above 100,000--then she should know how much it already costs us to take care of the uninsured and how high those costs are because they don't have preventative care or get care in the early stages of an illness. The difference between a doctors office visit and a prescription and a couple days in the ICU to get something under control is astounding. This kind of savings will come in gradually over several years. And don't worry about doctors quitting over fees--a few will but most will not--being a MD is part of their identity and they can't just retire or quit usually unless something forces them--like a major illness themselves. There are other cost transfer and added income provisions. Not saying that it won't increase costs, but doing nothing will increase them even more. Repeal of "Obamacare" is just a conservative rallying point. It is a political football that the conservatives whip into hysteria. They can not be factual about it since they have made it this. We may not ever get a chance to reform health care again anytime soon if these idiots manage to dismantle it. And the cost of health care will bury us because we could not agree to do anything.

Could have voted for single payer, but no, we can't have anything nice.

@ Dean,

right on the money - wrong on logic...

"What can he do to me? Or to any of us?" Scalia said. "We have life tenure and we have it precisely so that we will not be influenced by politics, by threats from anybody." Very mature for a "legal" expert...

BobbyG...You completely misinterpret Scalia's comment. The way I read is simple. He's been on the court for years and makes his decision simply on his interpretation of a law as it pertains to the Constitution and not politics. Period. IMO, his statement was simple. Unfortunately there is no respect extended to those justices who were appointed by conservative presidents. Chief Justice Roberts is the only one because he sided with the liberal Justices in what I see as an act of Public Relations.

Who's paying your healthcare costs Dean? It isn't you by the way...most americans who have insurance are paying a fraction of the actual cost...what's your plan Dean? I thought so...

Scalia's decision was pure politics.

Considering the Conservative Heritage Foundation came up with the concept of Individual Mandate, in the first place, do you believe that if a Republican President had passed this, Scalia would have still said this was unconstitutional?

Bart,

The Heritage Foundation also realized that mandating people purchase something is unconstitutional.

You cannot live in a world where only Your opinion and what you choses to recognize as truth is the law of the land. There is always someone who will stand up at some point and fill in what you chose to ignore.

Umm...

DB wasn't the individual mandate floated as the alternative to Hillary's HC proposal during the Clinton administration? From the GOP? And wasn't it enacted by your current GOP Presidential candidate in Massachusetts?

Scalia says in one breath that the justices are above politics. Just before that he said he would want some one to replace who had the same political leanings. Really???? Above politics??????

Scalia says in one breath that the justices are above politics. Just before that he said he would want some one to replace who had the same political leanings. Really???? Above politics??????

Judicial philosophy is not equal to politics.

"Of course, I would not like to be replaced by someone who immediately sets about undoing everything that I've tried to do for 25 years, 26 years, sure. I mean, I shouldn't have to tell you that. Unless you think I'm a fool."

No, Justice Scalia, we don't think you are a fool, simply a partisan hell-bent on reversing 100 years of legislation by your legislating from the bench.

Basedrum, while you are somewhat correct that it was an alternate to Hillarycare, it was actually written before Clinton was president. The author of the idea has also stated the mandate was a mistake/wrong.

The mandate was and will always be correct.We must have a national health care system to make it affordable for all. The ,what should be obvious, reasoning behind all people.in a nation participating is because the healthiest are the young who don't need it. Yet! They are making it possible to be affordable,initially. It is ,as most things are ,a Pre-payed system. All of the Nations that have now been fortunate enough to obtain it know that it must be a National scheme, and have made it so.

How is it affordable for those just above the income level for Medicaid? For those who are border line income, this is a disaster.

Americans readily accept the concept of providing care in emergency rooms to any and all comers without regard to the individuals health insurance. This exemplifies that Americans would not walk away from an injured or sick person if there was anything that one could do to help that person, excepting, of course, a few American attendess at the Republican nomination debates who shouted to let those without insurance die.

I also believe that Americans like to do things others, as efficiently as possible. I also believe that Americans prefer (at least for now) health care provided by the private sector as opposed to government health care.

The most efficient way to provide aid to "normally" sick or injured persons is not through the expensive generalized services of emergency room, but through the efficient services of health care physicians who provide preventive care, and can direct a patient to specialists in the treatment of whatever malady the patient is experiencing.

Given the American will to efficiently provide health care via private sector to all who need it, the only rational way to do it is via an insurance pruchase mandate.

If we want to let people die in the streets from lack of health insurance, then there is no need to mandate the purchase of insurance.

This is a pragmatic American exceptionalism in action.

Scalia and Thomas have been seen attending Koch Industries and Federalist Society meetings. I'd call that pretty political.

Saintvrain - you seem out of touch with reality.

@ Saint,

each of the 3 branches of our government usually criticize each other - this is the first time a sitting Supreme Court justice has criticized the court that he sits on and a decision that his court made...

No, Obama was right to criticize them. Scalia and Thomas had ethically questionable dealings and relations with Citizens United and their Koch backed affiliates before during and after the decision. They campaigned at fundraisers for these groups. They had already turned the case into a political campaign long before Obama was even elected. They get away with it by saying things like "what can they do to me - I've got life tenure!" It is ethically unsound, dangerous, and corrupt. You don't need a law degree to see that. Somebody had to say something about the wholesale selling of America that was being conducted by these people and the corruption on the Court that was allowing it. The decision was wrong because it devalues your vote. It is likely the largest and single most influential decision the SCOTUS has made in years and it will have a chilling affect on transparency and lead immediately to a spread of corruption in our government. From there, every other action of government will be clouded from the American people as trillions of dollars of influence flow into the pockets of our leaders who merely feign concern for the interests of their real constituents while serving only their corporate leash holders.

Saint, I guess you don't approve of free speech for the President? Stupid and arrogant applies to you just fine.

the republicons have been whining about the supreme court for years and years !!!!

I would still like to know why Thomas didn't recuse himself ?????

Turns out Obama was absolutely correct in predicting what would happen with Citizens United.

Do you think Citizens United was a proper decision, in the best interest of this entire country?

The job of the court is to determine what is constitutional and not what is in the best interest of the country. Aren't all of you on the left saying that is the case with the PPACA ruling - that Roberts ruled on constitutionality of the law? If you are saying he ruled based on "what is best for the country", he should be impeached as that is not his job.

B--D--/ If the Constitution is inviolate ,then why do we have amendments to it? It has been assumed by the instigators of it,that it will always need amending,which it has,from time to time. The Supreme Court Justices,may decide what is,or is not constitutional,but our Political Representatives still make amendments to it,to meet the present improvements for their Employers,We the People.

And, amendments to the constitution are part of the constitution. There is a process for changing the document that is not the court's job but is the congress and the state's job.

Citizens United has profited Obama mightily, so why should he go against it? Ditto all other 'elected' officials.

Citizens United has profited Obama????? What does that mean? AMERICA is subject to unlimited dollars influencing it's government by private corporations that need to ONLY report to their shareholders. This is the MOST short-sighted decision ever cursed upon this country since we wrestled control out of the hands of the robber barons from our not that distant past.

Does this country have to relearn it's history every generation?

Both parties are forced to use these corporate influenced dollars in order for them to have their candidates stand a chance of winning.

Each one of us should contact our Congress members and tell them we want this decision REVERSED. I dare anyone of you to tell me the merits of NOT DOING THIS?

He's an arrogant MF. I'm sure that is the commoly opinion of most of the other justices.

The MAJORITY of the cort ruled for the MAJORITY of AMERICAN CITIZENS.

@ Saint,

and yet if you don't pay your taxes on time the "penalty" you pay is interest charged on your taxes...

I don't understand the HC mandate.......

seniors have a mandate on the Medicare prescription part D plan..if they enroll in a plan after they become eligible they have to pay a penalty for every month they were eligible to join a plan but didn't ..and they pay that penalty for the rest of their coverage....my Mom already had to pay an up front penalty since 2006 and has to pay a penalty in her monthly premium for the rest of her life.. and she don't take any meds so how come seniors have to pay that if this Health care stipulation is unconstitutional...how come it's not unconstitutional for seniors...

You do know, don't you, that there is a difference between a tax and a taxing authority. The Court ruled that Congress has the right to impose fees, fines and penalties under that authority.

Then drop your heavily subsidized tax avoided insurance...just don't show up at the hospital with your sick kid...I don't want to pay for you freeloaders anymore

Amunaka - you explained your misunderstanding in your own comments - if they don't ever purchase Part D, there is no penalty. The only "mandatory" part of Medicare is Part A. All other parts are completely voluntary.

If you mom dropped Part D, she would no longer pay that penalty, right?

The MAJORITY of the cort ruled for the MAJORITY of AMERICAN CITIZENS.

So, let me see if I've got this right. 55% of Americans don't want this plan, but the court ruled for the majority?! How can that be, if 55 is more than 45???? Incidentally, it's funny how this "majority rule" is alright, unless, of course, it "infringes" on the rights of minority special interest groups. Then, all of a sudden, it's "wrong".

To bookem """

Well why do they have to pay a monthly premium for medicare isn't that a mandate..

Pay attention. The decision is to allow us to do this, as a taxing authority, not as a tax. We have given our government this right long ago. Our success as a nation is due to our systems in place which has resulted in our success.

We can always do better, and need to as our success is getting thin in many areas. Why can't people pay attention to our deficits in education, heathcare and infrastructure, NOW?

@Bookum - " The only "mandatory" part of Medicare is Part A. All other parts are completely voluntary.'

Your conclusion is both right and wrong. In many instances the insurance companies you pay your premiums to will DROP YOUR COVERAGE if you are medicare eligible and DO NOT take both Part A and B. It is that way for TRICARE for military veterans. And here is the rub. They DO NOT TELL YOU that you MUST ACCEPT PART A AND B. What happens is you get the part A free basically and when you fail to take the part B, you get a letter from TRICARE saying your health insurance is now GONE. TRICARE and other insurers like them, ALWAYS CONSIDER THEMSELVES 2ndry insurers when you have medicare eligibility.

Now while this don't sound like a huge deal, let's take a look at what it means to a DISABLED or RETIREMENT AGE MILITARY VETERAN with a family. Under the current TRICARE you have a choice of PRIME or Standard. Standard is free for the vet, but they must pay a premium for the family and the cost share/co-pays are much larger and a higher catastrophic cap, than prime. However, under prime and standard they are considered HMO type plans. SO, you pay Tricare for your health coverage because of your family or your distance away from a MTF (military treatment facility). NOW you are Part A and B eligible. So in addition to paying for your TRICARE you must now also pay for the PART B Coverage, in order to continue to have TRICARE. For a retiree - that pittance of a retirement check is now reduced even more. They take the 94-108 bux out of your social security check, the tricare allotment out of your retirement check, and your "golden years" are now costing you more and more, on an already fixed income.

Now you could say what about VA healthcare or who cares about TRICARE. But if you have a family, and NOW with the mandate you must carry both. VA healthcare, well let's not get me started on their incompetence (I could tell you about a letter telling me I was dying from ALS, when I hadnt been to the VA in over a year), or we could talk about how VA HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS claim they didn't have training on sanitizing medical and dental equipment, which infected other vets with HIV and Hepatitis. Not to mention the VA health system is only for the vet, and not the family. In other words, you pay double for the "so called optional" of Medicare Part B. I would also caution anyone who has private health insurance to check with their carriers to find out THEIR RULES before opting out of ANY PORTION of Medicare if you are eligible to recieve (I mean pay for those supposed) benefits.

Amen. Scalia is a disgrace to the court, an insult to its dignity, and the end of the court's reputation as being above the fray.

It's really sad... making appearances on the most politically biased, unfair and unbalanced network, bashing decisions, promoting a book... If he had an ounce of respect for the court, he'd resign.

Saitvarain - the devil is in the details, there should be TERM LIMITS on ALL OFFICES that serve the PUBLIC AT LARGE.

You were incorrectly informed. They are not there to serve in the best interest of anyone but the US Constitution.

Amunaka - no, they just have very STRONG COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS.

If have any proof of this, I would suggest you contact the AG to at a minimum start impeachment proceedings.

AG????ERIC HOLDER???? thats like the fox guarding the chicken coop

*help = held

They don't want Obamacare, but they want each part of it - just not the whole thing. But they do want every part of it at the same time in. The American people don't seem to know what they want. They only know what they are told to be afraid of.

Polls are just that buddy. If you ask people yourself I bet you would find out otherwise and that real people want and need Obamacare. And people will need a definition of what is health care insurance once we get into it. Health care insurance ain't what we have been getting as of late. We pay high premiums and when we need it we pay high deductibles yada yada. Heck is what we get worth the cost? And while I am at it....

Why it is we pay so much for prescription drugs when they been invented in state colleges and universities on grants from the US government from taxpayer money by students using student loans?

Notsosmart

Why it is we pay so much for prescription drugs when they been invented in state colleges and universities on grants from the US government from taxpayer money by students using student loans?

You just proved your name, Notsomart. After almost 40 years in the drug industry (and I don't mean illegal drugs), I know where more than 98% of our prescription meds come from: private industry. The grants to universities that you carp about are NOT from the government; they are from drug companies that provide money to pharmacologists to work in their TIME OFF. I worked as a student on a formulation problem that the manufacturer could not solve inhouse. They gave us a grant and when I worked in the compounding lab, it was after classes on my own time and I was paid from that grant. The supplies I used were provided by the manufacturer and replenished by the manufacturer when I ran low. The ONLY things I used that were university property were pieces of equipment in the compounding lab and those had been provided by other manufacturers from surplus or outmoded equipment paid for by the manufacturers.

Next time talk to someone who knows about the topic before you spit up or spout off on these page!!!!!

@Bob in KC - ....and I suppose big Pharma built the university and paid for the staff that maintains it.....next time YOU want to spout off maybe you should take a breath first and realize that you are not the one "that knows the topic".

bob

wake up on the wrong side of the world today?

Saintvrain,

Those who are opposed to "Obamacare" as you so disrespectfully call it, have been lied to about what it contains (remember death panels?). Since you are so disrespectful of the president, you give yourself away as a FOX news watcher. If people could hear tthe truth about the ACA there would be more support for it. Do yourself a favor and turn off FOX and Beck and Limbaugh, and read the act for yourself.

Citizens United has been ruled constitutional. Get over it.

Citizens United has not been ruled constitutional. What was done in Citizens United was that the "conservative" majority of the court turned over the political process in America to the control of the wealthiest citizens, and so disenfranchised the 99%. That was not constitutional, it was a deliberate hijacking of the system. The rational was that you cannot separate the freedom to give unlimited amounts of money to political ends and purposes from the constitutional right to free speech - the two are legally and constitutionally inseparable. That, simply put, is a crock, and judge Scalia knows it. He and his fellow "conservatives" should have recognized reasonable limitations and placed control of the political process in America back in the hands of people. Their sworn duty as justices is, as Lincoln observed, to preserve government of the peope, by the people and for the people. PACs, corporations, partnerships, unions, associations, and other artificial people cannot vote . . . yet.

Nope, the SC ruled, therefore the issue being argued was found constitutional. GET OVER IT, as Mspielman says.

From your opinion Hatfeild the only people who have a right to an opinion are liberals and those who agree with them. Its shows just how small your brain is and just how biggoted you are. You must be one of those who ancestors fought to keep slaves and are now pissed cause you dont have any slaves to beat up.

Deportment can be used and you ought to be looked at as well. If you don't like our system, go..leave...adios...

Leftist, it is apparent that spelling, grammar, and thought are not your strengths.

May I suggest that you Liberal haters look up,in a Dictionary, the word Liberal, Political.

How do you know that..have you been listening in on their conversations in bed and elsewhere? Perhaps you can land a job working for ET!

@ notsosmart

Antone knows it because HE READ the article, where that little tidbit was printed. You've been posting a litany of BS trying to support your ideology and you've proved that your IQ is not more than a single digit, instead of embarrassing yourself even more why not head back over to FOX where your BS is accepted as fact and welcome, or go back to sleep before you hit your helmet on something and hurt yourself.

I'm aware of how the Constitution is changed. I just dumbed it down because I didn't feel like writing a novel. Thanks for the support.

Scalia is really screwed then because Heaven don't want him and Hell is afraid he is going to take over.

He should take up Bocce Ball.

Or get tested by psychiatrist to see if they are sane.