[Alberta's Child]

Believe it or not, the Supreme Court decision in the ObamaCare case was not unreasonable.

There's a misconception that the decision upheld ObamaCare in its entirety -- when it was, in fact, it only related to the individual mandate.

There are a whole host of other avenues to challenge to constitutionality of various ObamaCare provisions. Some of them have been successful. Some of them haven't even been pursued at all -- which makes me wonder just how serious some of the alleged opponents of ObamaCare really are.

[pgyanke]

There's a misconception that the decision upheld ObamaCare in its entirety -- when it was, in fact, it only related to the individual mandate.

I agree that there are other avenues to attack Obamacare... but in what clause of the Constitution did we give the Fed Gov the power to order citizens into private contracts?

[Jim Noble]

The intent of the Senators and Congressmen who passed Medicare in 1965 was for it to serve as a wedge to wreck the existing system, and they have (finally) come close to victory.

The only thing the American people don't like about ObamaCare is the name, and paying for it.

When the hospital system collapses, ObamaCare adds a degree of complexity to what will have to be done, but it will be nationalization in all but name. Wilbur Mills and Mike Mansfield will no doubt be smiling down (or up) at their final victory.

It won't be long, now. Motus in fine velocior.

[itsahoot]

which makes me wonder just how serious some of the alleged opponents of ObamaCare really are.

Really? Even after we held Both Houses and the Presidency and still they refused to repeal it, after promising for years they would if only they had all three? Yep I am not so inclined to wonder at all.