Joe Miner

I didn't make that claim. You are the one saying that something needed to be done, so you are happy that something was done. That's a stupid position to take.

Read my lips. No new taxes.

I'll try to simplify this for your special brand of stupidity. Can Congress tax - Yes Can Congress penalize - No Was this written to be a tax - No Is it now a tax due to Court ruling - Yes

Not a serious question right? We just need a lockbox for the ACA tax money, so that it will be there to cover the costs of ACA. When has Congress ever been able to keep their hands out of a cookie jar filled with money?

To me, it only functions how it's written. And it's not written as a tax. The bill doesn't function as it was written. It now functions with a bit of editing by the Court.

When you play politics in writing a bill, you should expect some ramifications. Congress specifically called it a penalty with the intent that it was not a tax. That's not semantics.

If Obama is good because he got us out of Iraq, what does that make Nixon?

Not saying he pulled it out of his ass. Just that if the law that was written didn't say it, and actually specifically said something that was agreed was unconstitutional, construing a different meaning to the law is, IMO, overreaching by the court. Basically the Court fixed the errors in the law for Congress.

Where we disagree is that Congress pinned this to a tax. I'm pretty sure Congress pinned (and penned) it to a penalty. Although the backup to the backup argument of the federal gov't in this case was that they had the ability to make it a tax. So the Supreme Court decided to go with argument #3 as the first two weren't valid, even though that wasn't actually written in the law. And I'm not really speaking for Robert's personally, I really don't care what his personal views are. I'm using Robert's in place of the Supreme Court.

We'll see. But have you ever seen the gov't do anything good when they discover a new way to tax people?

I don't know what Robert's wants. But I do know that ACA didn't actually say what the justices massaged it into saying. This isn't a newspaper where Congress are the writers and the Court is the editor. You shouldn't just get to slap **** down, and wait for someone to fix your mistakes later.

Robert's. Congress has no idea what the Constitution is, or how it's incorporated into their job.

It's about whether we can change what's written just enough to make it pass a Constitutional check.

"So even though Congress wrote a law that doesn't say anything that would make it constitutional, we can see what they meant and we've fixed it up for them." Yes, doing something is always better than doing nothing.

So you were talking out of your ass when you claimed it was predictable. Good to know

So you look to the idiots who wrote a behemoth of bill, but didn't read it, to have the sense to streamline it and make it work? What possible history can you be looking at to suggest that will happen?

Your prediction a page ago said the mandate would likely go down. Were you talking out of your ass then, now, or both?

No, we think you're an idiot for wanting to make it an amendment to the Constitution. That was your subject. Not whether or not we need campaign finance changes.

No kidding. WTF? Since we're up for putting stupid **** in there, maybe we can just start adding things like favorite recipes or top 10 lists to the Constitution as well?

Gobble Gobble mother!@#$ers

Did you take one when you were on the line for murder? You may be able to fake one with ease, but I guarantee that the vast majority of America can't. Does this mean he's innocent? No. I think at best it helps portray him as a guy that has tried to cooperate. But being a good guy with good intentions doesn't mean he is or will be found not guilty.

Not to defend stupidity too much, but a sports writer could conceivably have Fitzgerald as an auto correct, since there are popular athletes named Fitzgerald. Then when they butcher the spelling of Fitzpatrick badly enough, the computer auto corrects it and neither they nor the editor notice.

It doesn't mean we shouldn't try to save the planet. I'm all on board the burning cats movement for a greener tomorrow! Get in the oven mittens! Oh, by the way, feel free to invest your charitable donation to my cat farm for a greener tomorrow. $20 buys you a cat that I'll set on fire to save the planet. Remain carbon neutral by purchasing 1 cat per tank of gas that you burn. Trust me, I've done the math, and this will save the planet. Remember burning a kitten gives the energy of 2 adult cats!

Lie Detector tests are racist!

Lol. Married and laid are almost polar opposites. Quick anecdote. Watched a show on TV about the Bubble Skin Man http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/bubble-skin-man-chandra-wisnu_n_1598516.html At some point in his interview, he says that he can still have sex 4 times a day. I looked at my wife and said, "Unbelievable." She said, "What?" I said, "He gets laid more than I do." Needless to say I didn't get laid that night either.