Typical Democrat...
Yer Pal Al
When asked what specific part of the Constitution authorizes Congress
to mandate that individuals must purchase health insurance:
"Well, that's under certainly the laws of the -- protect the health,
welfare of the country. That's under the Constitution. We're not even
dealing with any constitutionality here. Should we move in that
direction? What does the Constitution say? To provide for the health,
welfare and the defense of the country." - Roland Burris, (D-Ill)
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56629
These are the people Democrats vote for to protect our rights.
Bill Shatzer
> http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56629
No one voted for Roland Burris.
How quickly they forget.
peace and justice,
Yer Pal Al
That's right! He was appointed by Blagojevich. I guess that's a
totally different wing of the Idiot Party.
Alex DeLarge
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bill Shatzer wrote:
And over 4,000 Americans have paid with their lives for that little
adventure. Plus a half a trillion dollars in national treasure
You might compare that with the number of lives lost on 9-11. Or the
economic injury incurred from that event.
It would have been cheaper in both lives and money to just suffer
another 9-11 every six or seven years.
Peace and justice,
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Alex DeLarge
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bill Shatzer wrote:
> How quickly they forget.
>
> peace and justice,
>
The Wiz
Sancho Panza
news:896bbd2f-b885-4922...@p33g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
" PELOSI: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail
JCT Confirms Failure to Comply with Democrats' Mandate Can Lead to 5 Years
in Jail
Friday, November 06, 2009
Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI)
released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT)
confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy
health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as
amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that
Americans who do not maintain "acceptable health insurance coverage" and who
choose not to pay the bill's new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of
income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including
criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: "This is the ultimate example of
the Democrats' command-and-control style of governing - buy what we tell you
or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately."
Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:
"H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of
a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain
acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his
or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax." [page 1]
- - - - - - - - - -
"If the government determines that the taxpayer's unpaid tax liability
results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply." [page
2]
- - - - - - - - - -
"Criminal penalties
Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses.
Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could
apply to an individual:
. Section 7203 - misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine
of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
. Section 7201 - felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to
$250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years." [page 3]
When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar
individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan
basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and
criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language
protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that
could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.
"The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme
penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi's decision to leave in the jail
time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000
premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that
will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting
Medicare," said Camp.
According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family
non-group plan under the Speaker's bill would cost $15,000 in 2016."
Juan
Here's a little exercise to you -- see if you can find what part of
the constitution mandates a 21 yr old drinking age, moron. :)
Juan
Mass. penalizes you if you don't have health care and can afford it.
LOL!
Alex DeLarge
> On Nov 6, 7:06 pm, Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ...An idiot.
>>
>> When asked what specific part of the Constitution authorizes Congress
>> to mandate that individuals must purchase health insurance:
>>
>> "Well, that's under certainly the laws of the -- protect the health,
>> welfare of the country. That's under the Constitution. We're not even
>> dealing with any constitutionality here. Should we move in that
>> direction? What does the Constitution say? To provide for the health,
>> welfare and the defense of the country." - Roland Burris, (D-Ill)
>>
>> http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56629
>>
>> These are the people Democrats vote for to protect our rights.
>
> Here's a little exercise to you --
STFU, you morbidly obese diaperboi.
Alex DeLarge
> And don't forget to check what part of Romney's health care plan
You dumbassholes never voted for him in the primaries, wise up no-neck.
Scratch
8a0820...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com:
> And don't forget to check what part of Romney's health care plan in
> Mass. penalizes you if you don't have health care and can afford it.
> LOL!
>
PELOSI: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail;
Failure to Comply, 5 Years in Prison...
--
The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not
first take from somebody else.
~ Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931-2005 ~
Just words, just speeches
Obama - 2008
Yer Pal Al
Guess what... There isn't a federal 21 YO drinking age law so fuck off
nitwit.
Juan
>
> > Here's a little exercise to you -- see if you can find what part of
> > the constitution mandates a 21 yr old drinking age, moron. :)
>
> Guess what... There isn't a federal 21 YO drinking age law so fuck off nitwit.
Eat me, bitch. You're so fucking stupid you fell right into the trap.
That's right, there is no law that requires it, there is no
constitutional need for it. But the federal government can mandate it,
and nobody gives a flying fuck if ignorant imbeciles like you like it
or not, because he who has the gold, makes the rules. Sit on that one
while I whittle you another one, you ignorant slut.
Alex DeLarge
> On Nov 7, 12:17 am, Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Here's a little exercise to you -- see if you can find what part of
>>> the constitution mandates a 21 yr old drinking age, moron. :)
>> Guess what... There isn't a federal 21 YO drinking age law so fuck off nitwit.
>
> Eat me, bitch.
Osito!
Su boca sucia!
You felch with that sewer?
Barack Hussein Bohica
Juan
I saw you the other day. Weren't you the putz on that pickup truck and
that sign saying "Watch this!" while driving without a seatbelt? LMAO!
Al
Alex DeLarge
> On Nov 7, 8:08 am, Barack Hussein Bohica
> <CharlieFoxt...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:49:16 -0800 (PST), Juan <fly...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 7, 12:17 am, Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Here's a little exercise to you -- see if you can find what part of
>>>>> the constitution mandates a 21 yr old drinking age, moron. :)
>>>> Guess what... There isn't a federal 21 YO drinking age law so fuck off nitwit.
>>> Eat me, bitch. You're so fucking stupid you fell right into the trap.
>>> That's right, there is no law that requires it, there is no
>>> constitutional need for it. But the federal government can mandate it,
>>> and nobody gives a flying fuck if ignorant imbeciles like you like it
>>> or not, because he who has the gold, makes the rules. Sit on that one
>>> while I whittle you another one, you ignorant slut.
>> This is your Juan on drugs.
>
> I saw you the other day.
You stalking people again, fatboi?
Alex DeLarge
Yer Pal Al
> On Nov 7, 12:17 am, Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Here's a little exercise to you -- see if you can find what part of
> > > the constitution mandates a 21 yr old drinking age, moron. :)
>
> > Guess what... There isn't a federal 21 YO drinking age law so fuck off nitwit.
>
> Eat me, bitch. You're so fucking stupid you fell right into the trap.
> That's right, there is no law that requires it, there is no
> constitutional need for it. But the federal government can mandate it,
There is no government mandate for a 21 YO drinking law you stupid
fuck. There's a Federal Law that's sometimes called a "drinking law"
but deals with purchase and posession. State's are free to have any
drinking age they wish. This State's right is guaranteed by the 21st
amendment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Drinking_Age_Act
Now bend over double and eat yourself you ignorant ignorant piece of
shit.
> and nobody gives a flying fuck if ignorant imbeciles like you like it
> or not, because he who has the gold, makes the rules. Sit on that one
> while I whittle you another one, you ignorant slut.
Puerto Rico is looking for you. They needed all four sides of the milk
carton.
Alex DeLarge
ROTFLMFAO!!!!
rack him.
Barack Hussein Bohica
wrote:
>On Nov 7, 8:08�am, Barack Hussein Bohica
><CharlieFoxt...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:49:16 -0800 (PST), Juan <fly...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Nov 7, 12:17�am, Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Here's a little exercise to you -- see if you can find what part of
>> >> > the constitution mandates a 21 yr old drinking age, moron. :)
>>
>> >> Guess what... There isn't a federal 21 YO drinking age law so fuck off nitwit.
>>
>> >Eat me, bitch. You're so fucking stupid you fell right into the trap.
>> >That's right, there is no law that requires it, there is no
>> >constitutional need for it. But the federal government can mandate it,
>> >and nobody gives a flying fuck if ignorant imbeciles like you like it
>> >or not, because he who has the gold, makes the rules. Sit on that one
>> >while I whittle you another one, you ignorant slut.
>>
>> This is your Juan on drugs...
>
>I saw you the other day. Weren't you the putz on that pickup truck and
>that sign saying "Watch this!" while driving without a seatbelt? LMAO!
...any questions?