Eleven states to challange mandate in court

Yes, I just wish this wasn't from the The Christian Science Monitor. Needs to come from the left at this juncture.

I do believe we will end up with a compromise between Fed and States. That's a good thing.

Don't be surprised if we hear the teabaggers are trying to talk them into going for a trifecta by adding the civil rights act and womens suffrage to the challenge.

Yes, I just wish this wasn't from the The Christian Science Monitor. Needs to come from the left at this juncture.

I don't understand what you're saying.

I don't understand what you're saying.

Christian = Right Wing. The fact is governors who are Dem and Rep are investigating the Constitutionality of this bill being signed into law.

Christian = Right Wing. The fact is governors who are Dem and Rep are investigating the Constitutionality of this bill being signed into law.

It's an article, not an editorial. Why "should" it come from the left wing?

CSM is known for factual reporting, not opinion pieces. And, they are not "Christian", they are owned by the church but I don't really see a slant in their reporting.

Yes, I just wish this wasn't from the The Christian Science Monitor. Needs to come from the left at this juncture.

I do believe we will end up with a compromise between Fed and States. That's a good thing.

CSM's not affiliated with religion or the religious right. It's just got a funny name. The site is very highly ranked on Google News. Never judge a book by it's cover Lynnie!

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Science_Monitor"]The Christian Science Monitor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

It's an article, not an editorial. Why "should" it come from the left wing?

CSM is known for factual reporting, not opinion pieces. And, they are not "Christian", they are owned by the church but I don't really see a slant in their reporting.

Good for you. I don't either, but I imagine some would shy away from this due to the name alone. Just my opinion.

Good for you. I don't either, but I imagine some would shy away from this due to the name alone. Just my opinion.

I know I get the same perception. They should change the name.

Well, back when I was in Journalism school (we used quill and papyrus), the CSM was renowned for their intelligent, factual reporting. Their standards were impeccable, and we didn't know anyone who was ever able to get a job with them.

To this day, they do not just reprint items from the news services, they use their own reporters, around the world.

They currently have an excellent "FAQ" about the health care bill that I think everyone needs to read.

I would think the two terms "christian" and "science" cancel each other out.

So Lynnie, where were you getting that information that 36 states were filing lawsuits?

The Associated Press: Idaho first to sign law aimed at health care plan

This is 'change,' swgb. Some have their respective Attorneys General investigating the constitutionality. Evidently, all over the internet dated today, I am seeing ten, then eleven, one report states twelve have filed. Perhaps the other 24 or 38 states + territories are still investigating. Who knows?

The Associated Press: Idaho first to sign law aimed at health care plan

This is 'change,' swgb. Some have their respective Attorneys General investigating the constitutionality. Evidently, all over the internet dated today, I am seeing ten, then eleven, one report states twelve have filed. Perhaps the other 24 or 38 states + territories are still investigating. Who knows?

Wow, 37, a super majority! That's incredible!

Well, back when I was in Journalism school (we used quill and papyrus), the CSM was renowned for their intelligent, factual reporting. Their standards were impeccable, and we didn't know anyone who was ever able to get a job with them.

To this day, they do not just reprint items from the news services, they use their own reporters, around the world.

They currently have an excellent "FAQ" about the health care bill that I think everyone needs to read.

A CSM subscription was required for both freshman government classes when I was at USC- the profs said it was the only paper that was factual and balanced. You don't hear about it as much any more, but maybe they will make a comeback.

Attorneys general in 11 states poised to challenge healthcare bill / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

We knew this was coming. It'll be interesting to see what happens. I honestly don't know how the SC will interpret the mandate. .

I don't see much coming of the SCOTUS challenge.

When Medicare was instituted it basically denied every American over the age of 65 the right to pick their primary insurance carrier ( and in some cases even their physician) and that survived challenges.

Remember we've got a government that says its fine to require someone to show ID, even when they are spending cash, but heinous to make them produce ID when they vote.

This is just another nibble away in the continuing erosion of individual rights.

Well, back when I was in Journalism school (we used quill and papyrus), the CSM was renowned for their intelligent, factual reporting. Their standards were impeccable, and we didn't know anyone who was ever able to get a job with them.

To this day, they do not just reprint items from the news services, they use their own reporters, around the world.

They currently have an excellent "FAQ" about the health care bill that I think everyone needs to read.

I was unaware of this as well. I can honestly say the name alone would have kept me from reading it. Thanks for letting us know its just not another soapbox for religious agendas!

I'm curious, how does the CSM deal with topics involving prescription drug coverage? I know that Christian scientists won't even take Aspirin.

I was unaware of this as well. I can honestly say the name alone would have kept me from reading it. Thanks for letting us know its just not another soapbox for religious agendas!

Same Here.

Wow, 37, a super majority! That's incredible!

In the long run, this will be a waste of time and a tremendous amount of state money.

Even this conservative sc will uphold the supremacy law of the constitution.

In the long run, this will be a waste of time and a tremendous amount of state money.

Even this conservative sc will uphold the supremacy law of the constitution.

Yep, those republicans love spending your tax dollars to make their political points.

Don't be surprised if we hear the teabaggers are trying to talk them into going for a trifecta by adding the civil rights act and womens suffrage to the challenge.

You know, as someone who believes in the Constitution and its strict interpretation and someone who believes in the Tea Party Movement and its goals, I take great umbrage at your insinuations that have nothing to do with their ideas or goals.
If you would really like to know what the tea party movement is all about why don't you try attending a meeting which occurs the 2nd Thursday of the month at the coastal branch library. You might even get enlightened on what they really want, which has nothing to do with civil rights or women's suffrage. You may have been saying the above "tongue in cheek" but if you weren't I am sorry for you because such an attitude toward some with a different idea of what government should be is extremely narrow minded at the least and downright disrespectful of one's right of expression, at most. Oh, one more thing. Its not "teabaggers", its patriots.

You know, as someone who believes in the Constitution and its strict interpretation and someone who believes in the Tea Party Movement and its goals, I take great umbrage at your insinuations that have nothing to do with their ideas or goals.
If you would really like to know what the tea party movement is all about why don't you try attending a meeting which occurs the 2nd Thursday of the month at the coastal branch library. You might even get enlightened on what they really want, which has nothing to do with civil rights or women's suffrage. You may have been saying the above "tongue in cheek" but if you weren't I am sorry for you because such an attitude toward some with a different idea of what government should be is extremely narrow minded at the least and downright disrespectful of one's right of expression, at most. Oh, one more thing. Its not "teabaggers", its patriots.

I could care less what you take umbrage to. When our representatives are spat upon and called ni**er and fa**ot by this group I will call them teabaggers or anything else I care to, just not patriots.

I don't see much coming of the SCOTUS challenge.

When Medicare was instituted it basically denied every American over the age of 65 the right to pick their primary insurance carrier ( and in some cases even their physician) and that survived challenges.

Remember we've got a government that says its fine to require someone to show ID, even when they are spending cash, but heinous to make them produce ID when they vote.

This is just another nibble away in the continuing erosion of individual rights.

Read a number of reports along these lines today, it does seem like a long shot. If not in the courts then, a republican Congress will have to fix all the flaws. Hopfully before people become dependent on it.

I don't see much coming of the SCOTUS challenge.

When Medicare was instituted it basically denied every American over the age of 65 the right to pick their primary insurance carrier ( and in some cases even their physician) and that survived challenges.

Remember we've got a government that says its fine to require someone to show ID, even when they are spending cash, but heinous to make them produce ID when they vote.

This is just another nibble away in the continuing erosion of individual rights.

Who has to show ID when spending cash? Where and when? I have never been asked, nor have I ever heard of this practice.

I could care less what you take umbrage to. When our representatives are spat upon and called ni**er and fa**ot by this group I will call them teabaggers or anything else I care to, just not patriots.

My 14 year old niece was recently explaining how her Social Studies class was discussing "your" representatives. She had this odd perspective that "your" representatives are also everyone else's representatives because "we" are all Americans?? Silly kids. I was also going to ask her what she would do if someone was so ignorant as to call her or her friends a bad word - because there is always at least one in every crowd?? But I know her and her parents too well - she would have given me the same ole turn the other cheek and don't dwell in the gutter with the trash, etc... Silly kids. Shocking how "our" political system has evolved into current status