[NeedKarma]

I know that your side thinks the constitution is toilet paper to be used and discarded as needed

You truly believe that 125 million americans view your constitution this way?

[speechlesstx]

So when some creepo has sex with a 12-year-old girl he can now just go pick up a pill to try and destroy the evidence. Great logic in that decision judge.

[NeedKarma]

You'd rather she get pregnant and carry the child to term?

[speechlesstx]

Wow, you really have no clue do you?

[NeedKarma]

It's your hypothetical, follow it through.

To answer your question I have lots of clues, do you? Ask Blue for a clue if you need one too.

[speechlesstx]

Like I said, creepy.

[NeedKarma]

Constantly thinking about 12 year old girls having sex is creepy indeed.

[talaniman]

Do you really think carrying a child to term for the evidence value in a rape case is a wise move? I think its crazy myelf, and know there are other options not as draconian. And what happens to the evidence AFTER the trial? I don't think the constitution is toilet paper, I just question your interpretation.

Life begins when you are born since conception with the best science is subject to human error. The laws says abortion is legal in the first trimester. Anything else is outside the law and subject to tort.

The church is not the law. Nor is it above the law, tax breaks or NOT.

[speechlesstx]

Constantly thinking about 12 year old girls having sex is creepy indeed.

Geez dude, you can get help for that. I'm sure your government will even pay for it.

[speechlesstx]

Do you really think carrying a child to term for the evidence value in a rape case is a wise move? I think its crazy myelf, and know there are other options not as draconian. And what happens to the evidence AFTER the trial? I don't think the constitution is toilet paper, I just question your interpretation.

Really Tal, you think sexual predators should have otc access to the morning after pill?

[talaniman]

Predators have no need but victims do.

[speechlesstx]

Smh.

[Tuttyd]

I'd first like to discuss the case. Here is the facts (condensed version) the FDA said it was ok for the abortion pill to be OTC and then the Head of the Executive Dept that the FDA answers to said no . That was the decision of Sebellius and be extension the decision of the Chief Executive of the United States.

Yes, but there is a lot of money to be made by the drug companies if OTC sales are as extensive as possible.

So now you have some putz judge in District Court in Brooklyn saying that is an unconstitutional decision ? ...and then he orders the FDA to make the pill available OTC ? I want to know what is the basis for this call ;and where in the constitution it says a judge can make law from the bench ?

This is what happens in complex systems. I think it is called unintended consequences.

[talaniman]

Its not an insurmountable obstacle.(?)

[Tuttyd]

Its not an insurmountable obstacle.(?)

Tal, have you got a different question?

I think part of the problem is that we have a genuine attempt at providing a non-political solution to the problem of government. Problems begin to arise when we attempt squeeze more and more highly charged political/ legal decisions from something that was never intended to function in this capacity.

[talaniman]

Problems may be difficult and highly charged with passionate feelings, but that doesn't mean there is no solution. I mean how long did it take Roe v Wade, civil rights, the end of slavery, and the first gun ban? Nothing happens over night, you have to keep pushing for what you want.

So you don't think the right adjustments can be made? I do, but that's why the question mark in (). You have to want to solve the problem and that's something I am not sure of. When two sides cannot compromise, then nothing gets done. That doesn't mean the problem won't get solved.

[tomder55]

What isn't an insurmountable problem ? A judge saying barely teen girls can get abortion pills OTC without parental consent creates an insurmountable problem. It's what that MSNBC moonbat was saying... parents don't "own" their kids . Our kids are nothing more than wards of the state. That same child is not permitted to take an aspirin or ibuprofen in school without teacher or nurse supervision... But she can pop an abortifacient like it's candy .

[paraclete]

Yes Tom it's a mad world and you know where this stems from, this nonsense about rights. It is good that people have rights and they know about it, but teaching youth about rights has produced a society where they are responsible to no one. The emphasis should be on teaching them responsibilities, not rights. Telling someone who hasn't reached their developmental potential they have rights is setting a ticking time bomb

[speechlesstx]

As tom noted one of the primary authors of Obamacare, Max Baucus, warned of the possibility (likelihood IMHO) of a “huge train wreck coming down” in ts implementation. Republican Sen. Mike Pompeo had some words for Baucus, it's your own fault, dude.

Dear Senator Baucus,

I was stunned, and also saddened, to read of your complaint that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is doing an insufficient job informing the public about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), otherwise known as Obamacare. My shock wasn’t because I disagreed: You’re right to say this legislation has led to great uncertainty for hard-working Americans, small business owners, and families. No, I was shocked because you wrote this bill. I was saddened because your acknowledgement of the harm caused by PPACA has come so late.

Unlike you, the American people have opposed this law from the moment it was first introduced in Congress. How hard was it to see that even the smartest government bureaucrats can’t competently plan something as complicated as America’s health-care sector?

President Obama’s proposal to rescind the Medicaid disproportionate share hospital payments for 2014 is an admission that this law will not work as written. The IRS is violating the clear language of this law by planning to spend more than half a trillion dollars and tax millions of employers and individuals without congressional authorization.

No one in the country bears more responsibility for the complexity of this law than you. When your supermajority couldn’t pass the bill using normal procedures, you and your Senate colleagues rammed through the final legislation by using parliamentary gimmickry. Then, in the House, Speaker Pelosi cheerfully urged members to pass the legislation “in order to find out what’s in it.”

This was not good policy-making, and now we’re seeing the consequences.

Implementation is still going full steam ahead despite numerous problems—with your support. Contrary to the legislation and the administration’s myriad promises, the SHOP exchanges have been delayed by a year. Officials have admitted that they’ve gone from worrying over the color of fonts on a website to just making sure that the exchanges aren’t a “third world experience.” Little to no information has been provided about how the exchanges will function.

Each one of these problems results from legislation you authored and your colleagues supported. And yet many Republicans, at every step of the process, issued warnings and condemnations based on exactly these inevitable problems. We warned that businesses would drop coverage. We warned that Americans would not be able to keep a doctor or plan that they liked. We warned that insurance premiums would increase.

Secretary Sebelius’s implementation of the law is certainly flawed, but the policy process produced a law that could not possibly be implemented successfully. As legislators, it is our responsibility to write bills that clearly explain our meaning and have achievable goals. By your own admission, this law is a disaster.

Make no mistake. Unless you act before it’s too late, the American people are going to hold you personally responsible for the failings of this law that negatively impact their jobs, their health, and their families. You drafted it, you twisted arms to get it passed, and, until now, you have lauded it as a model for all the world. Your attempts to pass the buck to President Obama’s team will not work, nor will they absolve you of responsibility for the harm that you have brought via this law.

Republicans have repeatedly offered legislation to repeal PPACA and replace it with more sustainable reforms that would have bipartisan support. Perhaps we can work together to fix this mess before it’s too late. We stand ready to repeal the law and put forward legislation that will truly benefit patients and their doctors.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Mike Pompeo
Member of Congress
Kansas 4th District

Legislate in haste, repent at leisure...

[tomder55]

Senator Max Baucus