TexasCHLforum.com

The Annoyed Man wrote:

emcee rib wrote:

drjoker wrote:

chasfm11 wrote:
Edit to add: There is no way that there will not be two appointments to SCOTUS before 2016.

Why?

Do you think he should have said it's unlikely instead of impossible?
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4c6.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

• Scalia is 76.
• Kennedy is 76.
• Thomas is 64.
• Ginsburg is 79.
• Breyer is 74.

The others are significantly younger. Ginsburg is the oldest and she's been battling cancer. Thomas is young enough to hang in there for a while longer. The two that will harm us the most if they step down will be Scalia and Kennedy. If Breyer and Ginsburg get replaced, it won't change the current makeup of the court—4 liberals, 4 conservatives, and an independent (Kennedy)—although the obvious "harm" would be that with Kagan and Sotomayor if teemed up with two reliably commie justices replacing Ginsburg and Bryer, that liberal half of the court would last for decades longer. I would be willing to bet that Scalia won't step down, precisely because he wants to outlast Obama and not give him a chance to pack the court. Thomas won't step down for the same reason. Kennedy is the only question, and my gut tells me he probably won't either.

If I were a betting man, I'd say that Ginsburg will step down, and that will be it. The court will otherwise remain unchanged until after 2016.

The timing gives the infected pustule and his orcs time to gather blackmail material against all of the ones he wants to leave.

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote: Obamacare will ensure that a sufficient number of hopelessly worthless seniors are eliminated so that the chosen ones on SCOTUS receive their care.

My S-I-L is extremely disabled but voted for Obama. I am waiting my chance to console her and ask her if her vote did her any good when she is eventuallly told that her only option from the death panel is assisted termination.

Anygunanywhere

I can understand a lot of the Obama angst, especially in regard to the Supreme Court, but Obamacare is literally a rehash of a Heritage Foundation plan from the late 80's.

If you don't like the mandate, or don't think the government should be pushing a massive giveaway to the private insurance industry, or think that it is unsustainable for economic reasons in the long run, that is completely valid.

But if you actually think "death panels" are a real thing, you are basing your outrage on bad information.

koolaid wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote: Obamacare will ensure that a sufficient number of hopelessly worthless seniors are eliminated so that the chosen ones on SCOTUS receive their care.

My S-I-L is extremely disabled but voted for Obama. I am waiting my chance to console her and ask her if her vote did her any good when she is eventuallly told that her only option from the death panel is assisted termination.

Anygunanywhere

I can understand a lot of the Obama angst, especially in regard to the Supreme Court, but Obamacare is literally a rehash of a Heritage Foundation plan from the late 80's.

If you don't like the mandate, or don't think the government should be pushing a massive giveaway to the private insurance industry, or think that it is unsustainable for economic reasons in the long run, that is completely valid.

But if you actually think "death panels" are a real thing, you are basing your outrage on bad information.

Oh, please. Stop defending the pustule and his orcs.

Obama backs IPAB ‘death panel’ again, despite bipartisan support for repeal

By Matthew Boyle | The Daily Caller

http://nation.foxnews.com/obamacare/201 ... els-debate

DENVER — During Wednesday evening’s presidential debate, President Barack Obama repeated his support for the controversial Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) — often dubbed by conservatives as Obamacare’s “death panels” — in a back-and-forth with GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

“It — when Gov. Romney talks about this board, for example, unelected board that we’ve created, what this is, is a group of health care experts, doctors, et cetera, to figure out, how can we reduce the cost of care in the system overall?” Obama said.

“Now, so what this board does is basically identifies best practices and says, let’s use the purchasing power of Medicare and Medicaid to help to institutionalize all these good things that we do,” Obama added.

I do not care what you claim about the Heritage Foundation. Regardless of where it comes from or who thought about it there will be rationing of health care and those who do not belong to the beautiful crowd will be denied care and/or euthanized.

You need a reality check.

Anygunanywhere

koolaid wrote: But if you actually think "death panels" are a real thing, you are basing your outrage on bad information.

Please explain what is different in the Affordable Care Act that will prevent this.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -year.html

There isn't any the financial aspects of Obamacare that is working as it was advertised. We will only have to wait until 2014 to see it in its full fledged implementation. Here is the sequence
1. All of the taxes and coverage demands will increase the private insurance premiums in 2014 by 100%
2. Private employers will dump employees on the government exchanges. Those will quickly become the single payer system that has always been publicaly desired by those who pushed Obamacare in the first place
3. There won't be enough revenue to cover the increased costs and "priorities" will be set.
http://www.tryondailybulletin.com/2012/ ... r-seniors/

If that is bad information, please show me sources that explain how this won't happen.

What will be interesting is how SCOTUS will rule on the remaining challenges to Obamacare and how the Federal DOJ will respond to Texas and others refusing implementation. I agree that Ginsberg will retire by 2016 and still believe that we will loose at least one other Justice. The balance in the Court will be affected.