You must have missed "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Go baack and reread that.

/sarc

"because President Obama promised that "if you like your current insurance, you can keep it."

It's nice of the knucklehead in chief to let Me know what I can or cant do!

I don't have insurance knucklehead and you aint's gonna makes Me attain some.

"I've skimmed the rest of the Constitution, and can't seem to find anything else that might apply. But again, I'm just an amateur."

If you've skimmed it, you are 100% more knowledgeable than lacwit! He's still trying to assemble a preamble.

Jay, you ignorant ______. Constitutionality is not determined by the words in the Constitution but rather by what five of the Justices want to be constitutional. In a twist of 'verdict first, verdict afterwards', this is 'decide first, justify afterwards', where they decide what the outcome is to be (for example, invalidating state laws that ban sodomy or limiting the President's ability to conduct war), then search for some basis to support their desired outcome.

And they all do it, it's not limited to just the liberal activist judges, the conservative justices had no problem making things up as they went along in order back in 2000.

So as far as Obamacare is concerned, if 5 out of 9 like Obamacare, Obamacare will be found to be constitutional. If only 4 like it, it won't be.

"But then I remembered that President Obama is a Constitutional scholar (albeit with a nonexistent paper trail documenting his scholarship), "

A less verbose, but equally accurate way of saying that would be: "But then I remembered that President Obama is an alleged Constitutional scholar."

As far as a Constitutional justification for Obamacare-- there isn't one. However the ship of our federal government being constrained by the Constitution sailed long ago, sadly.

I don't think it matters. I mean, despite what the law just passed says, we all know that was passed in an earlier time, and if the framers of that law knew what we knew now, they would understand the need to interpret the law as a living document, to be kept current with the times. So it's certainly the case that the law says that we all have to purchase insurance from an exchange, but that clearly was to make sure that everyone was able to get the insurance they want. So the intent of the law is surely that we can buy insurance from anywhere we want, or not buy it if we don't want. Right?

Are you still using that old, outdated version that evil dinosaurs like Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas read? You need a copy of the modern "Living Constitution" with the Complete Annotated Penumbras. I think it's somewhere in the fourth or fifth Emanation.

Scholar or not, I believe obama has a disregard for the constitution, for the flag, for most of the American people, for our military and for America itself. His pores reek with dislike.

It is up to us, to make sure he does not forget what the constituition stands for by getting him and his type out of office as soon as possible.

"We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal..."

Obama doesn't even know the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence ...

By congresses interpretation of the Constitution, the federal government could force us to buy anything : a certain brand of automobile, a type of gum, anything they declared for the common good. That's hokum.

As for car insurance...no one has to buy it.

Same goes for home insurance.

And if we really want to get down to it, what about Roe VS Wade?

Doesn't each woman have the right to decide about her own body?

How can she ( or he ) be forced to buy something that gets between personal choice and one's physician?

Wouldn't it be a piece of irony if Roe VS Wade was used as a precedent to overthrow this bill?

Jay Tea

The part about congress can force us to buy health care insurance is right after the part about abortion is an absolute right and right before the part that says the government can take away our firearms because they want to. See it is easy. Just follow the chronological order of things and you will find them easy enough.

You need a copy of the modern "Living Constitution" with the Complete Annotated Penumbras.

"Obama doesn't even know the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence ..."

Yes, However, He knows the difference between His malicious presidency, "rules for radicals" & Jebidiahs stinky church of hate screed pews.

ZERO.......

"Obama doesn't even know the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence ..."

Yes He doesnt!! Its written right between those dumbo ass ears!

TJ: Obamacare isn't inconsistent with RvW, there's no requirement in Obamacare that anyone actually use the health insurance they're required to buy.

"TJ: Obamacare isn't inconsistent with RvW, there's no requirement in Obamacare that anyone actually use the health insurance they're required to buy."

Thanks steve.. So its kind of like Social Security!! Accept in Barry's minuscule self obsessed mind, this one is all about his vain egotistical need to take from others to replace the self esteem He never received as an addling child. Why should We all pay for His parents fuck up?

Oh, I know, because there are at least 50 million other fuck ups out there of voting age to.

Jay: You overlooked all those umbras and penumbras that SCOTUS so conveniently found in 1973 to regulate states rights on social issues.

Until '92 (U.S. vs Lopez), it appeared that anything the Federal Gov't wanted to do was possible under the Commerce Clause.

I haven't seen an argument for the basis for the Constitutionality of Obamacare. I'd also be interested in seeing that argument.

I am not sure bankruptcy is consistent with promoting the general welfare.

Dr. Williams has an excellent article this week on this very idea, and he rips the Health Care Bill to shreds over it's unconstitutionality.

Could someone point me in the right direction?

Barry has Ayers working on those 're-education' camps. "Invitations" will be forthcoming shortly.

Just the teacher in me, but since too much of America watches those stupid TV contest shows about singing and dancing and 5th grade educational information, and if we wanted to stop the left, we need a hit TV program called "What does the Consitution really say?"

Why, Much of America would have the darn thing memorized and texted across state lines in a nano-second -just to win the million bucks. That's a lot cheaper than these trillion dollar deficits....

If the goal of Obamacare is to "promote the general Welfare", then it will succeed. Obamacare is a huge set of taxes and regulations on employment. Taxing employment means will get less employment, and that means more people on welfare.

...we need a hit TV program called "What does the Consitution really say?"

That must be it, Kevino. When Obama read "promote the general welfare" he must've thought it said "put eveybody on welfare". It's a rare form of dyslexia called Marxlexia.

I don't intend this as a selfish plug, but here's a post I offered on the 12th, discussing the Constitutionality of this matter of insurance reform:

http://www.lifeinsuranceonmyterms.com/health-insurance/states-for-freedom-1

(The discussion of the Constitution and federal powers comes about halfway down.)