Supreme Court ObamaCare

Joe wrote:

FredHayek wrote: I found it interesting that while the Supremes did make their decisions today they're allowed to change their minds and rewrite the seperate opinions until the announcement in June.

So do you think there is going to be a media push and scare tactics strategy by the Dems to change the SC votes before June? How about the chance for an earlier decision since this is so important to the economy?

Good point. I know it is tradition to wait to announce their decision but I would think with a law that is already in effect you would want to make a ruling now. Maybe the Supremes need to rethink this.

FredHayek wrote:

Joe wrote:

FredHayek wrote: I found it interesting that while the Supremes did make their decisions today they're allowed to change their minds and rewrite the seperate opinions until the announcement in June.

So do you think there is going to be a media push and scare tactics strategy by the Dems to change the SC votes before June? How about the chance for an earlier decision since this is so important to the economy?

Good point. I know it is tradition to wait to announce their decision but I would think with a law that is already in effect you would want to make a ruling now. Maybe the Supremes need to rethink this.

The provisions that were at issue do not take effect until 2014.

archer wrote: Wait just a minute here.....so the Post and you know for a fact that Obama's mother didn't have to worry about the rising cost of cancer care and insurance coverage at the time of her treatment? Really? I've just been through it and had really good insurance......I spent as much time dealing with BC/BS as I did dealing with chemo and doctors......sure everything gets billed directly to the insurance company, then you get the statements and find out some things have been denied. They paid easily for my first chemo treatment, then denied payment for the second, It was some sort of coding error that only took 6 months to fix......then you fight with the company and the doctors to make sure everything gets coded right and sent on time. At one point I had over $6000 in denied treatments that took numerous phone calls and lots of forms to file, and fighting on the phone to get them covered.....it was a nightmare to deal with while at the same time trying to cope with the side effects of chemo and and several hospital visits. For all of you who haven't been through it don't assume you or the Washington Post know what the hell you are talking about.

You evidently did not read the article... you'll find your answer there.

LadyJazzer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: And Obama lying about his mom? He is a perfect example of the guy who is used to no one questioning what he says.

You're a liar...

Of course Fred is lying... because Obama is not only being questioned, has has been found out to be a liar...

During the 2008 campaign, Obama frequently suggested his mother had to fight with her health-insurance company for treatment of her cancer because it considered her disease to be a pre-existing condition. In one of the presidential debates with GOP rival John McCain, Obama said:

“For my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend the last months of her life in the hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they’re saying that this may be a pre-existing condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment, there’s something fundamentally wrong about that.”[/i]

But then earlier this year, journalist Janny Scott cast serious doubt on this version of events in her excellent biography, “A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s mother.” Scott reviewed letters from Dunham to the CIGNA insurance company, and revealed the dispute was over disability coverage, not health insurance coverage (see pages 335-339).

Obama is talking about HER TREATMENT... and her treatment was paid... ARCHER... trying to make some sort of connection between his/her insurance problem with Dunham's and says

Archer wrote: "At one point I had over $6000 in denied treatments that took numerous phone calls and lots of forms to file..."

Well Ms. Dunham did not have to argue or fight with her insurance company because almost all the cost related directly to her cancer was paid.

Scott writes that Dunham, who died in 1995 of uterine and ovarian cancer, had health insurance that “covered most of the costs of her medical treatment…The hospital billed her insurance company directly, leaving Ann to pay only the deductible and any uncovered expenses, which, she said, came to several hundred dollars a month.”

Obama was lying when he said "may be a pre-existing condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment." They did pay her treatment. And this recent campaign video narrated by Tom Hanks... every so slightly modifies his 2008 statement. Why the change? Because Obama (the white black) was lying, was pandering to his political base, and had no scruples in modifying the truth for his own purposes.

This is the President that the left elected. And now it's all falling apart. The left should be might proud.

"They did pay her treatment"

Was this before or after she had to fight for it? Do you know? Of course you don't. But you spout off about it because some newspaper, who also doesn't know, told you so.

archer wrote: "They did pay her treatment"

Was this before or after she had to fight for it? Do you know? Of course you don't. But you spout off about it because some newspaper, who also doesn't know, told you so.

Once again you didn't read the article, did you?

archer wrote: "They did pay her treatment"

Was this before or after she had to fight for it? Do you know? Of course you don't. But you spout off about it because some newspaper, who also doesn't know, told you so.

No... it's not because some newspaper told me so. If you had read the article (which you apparently didn't), or even paid attention to my comments, you would know that this information came directly from correspondence between the CIGNA insurance company and Ms. Dunham.

Scott reviewed letters from Dunham to the CIGNA insurance company, and revealed the dispute was over disability coverage, not health insurance coverage (see pages 335-339).

Would you like me to look up the phone number for CIGNA so you can call them and verify this information. I'm not sure how closer to the source you need to be. Obama lied, plain and simple.

archer wrote: "They did pay her treatment"

Was this before or after she had to fight for it? Do you know? Of course you don't. But you spout off about it because some newspaper, who also doesn't know, told you so.

Archer is there anything in Obamacare that fixes this? Seems to me they can still play their games of "medically unnecessary" and "uncovered expense". The state insurance commissions need to do a better job on this. Currently you have to hire an independent insurance advocate to fight the insurers to get the claims paid.

If any part of Obamacare is considered unconstitutional....the whole act is unconstitutional.

how so residenttroll? no severability clauses?

been looking for you. enjoy your posts and couldn't find them.