hblask

[citation needed]

Insurance /= care.

As a famous judge mouthed at a state of the union address, that's "not true". There is no precedent that says that you lose your right to free speech if you pool your money with someone else.

OK, I've been away for awhile, but since you wrote this the Obama administration has since admitted that this is not the case, and that the SC is *supposed to* strike down laws that violate the Constitution. So even the current administration says you are wrong.

I don't understand the voting tonight... two girls voted for Tarzan? Was that to split the vote? But wouldn't that be dangerous when you only have a one vote margin? It seems like there may be some alliances they're not showing...

I think it will be predictable now for a while... the previews showed a possible girls power play, but if that happens, then it will still play out predictably for a while.Either way my guy Lief is in trouble, he just can't make a decent alliance. He has lasted longer than I expected, but pretty much has zero chance at winning.

I think there is little chance they will throw out the whole law, despite a fair amount of precedent that says they should. I think just getting rid of the individual mandate will be considered enough for them. Of course, the bill doesn't work without it, so then all sorts of questions come up about what's next for the bill.... but that's getting ahead.

When this case first came up I gave it something like 80% chance that Obamacare would be ruled constitutional.I now think it's probably the opposite, 80% it will be ruled unconstitutional. Kennedy's comments were just too direct to think he's going to change his mind.

This sounds about right. He decided he was going to make sure this kid got arrested this time. An eyewitness said Martin was on top of Zimmerman hitting him just before the shot was fired. But a scared kid gets cornered by a guy with a gun, is he allowed to fight back? I think Zimmerman caused this, got himself into trouble and was forced to defend himself. But if you chase someone down and confront them, are you innocent when that stupidity goes wrong?And it is appalling the way Obama and the Dems are using this as another excuse to play the race card. Last I heard, Hispanics were

And no hate, and magical unicorns would fart lucky rainbows on all the world.Or maybe we could hope central planning works. It's a toss-up on which will occur first.

This is from one of those wacky blog websites where you never know how much truth is involved, but it's interesting if it's true:Counterfeit gold at Fort Knox

Yeah, that was exactly the point: every single character, up and down the line, was replaced by another character filling the same spot in the ecosystem. It was their way of re-stating the point of the series: the Insane War on Drugs doesn't change anything except the names of the victims.

Yeah, I know what his campaign guy was going for, and he was correct as far as that goes, but compariing someone whose biggest weakness is a reputation for not having any firm positions to an Etch-a-sketch is pretty hilarious. It's one of those moments where taking it just slightly out of context is far more entertaining -- and revealing -- than caring about what he meant to say.

I didn't see a lot that was wrong about his opinions on religious freedom. I'm pretty sure that those who would limit the exercise of religious freedom are on the wrong side of this one. Yes, I know that the court has said that religious freedom doesn't really mean what it says, but they also say that growing food and eating yourself is interstate commerce. There have been a lot of egregiously bad decisions since FDR tried to pack the courts, and it will take decades to reverse them all.

I think Kim and Chelsea are in a really good position now, with friends on both the men and the women's side and an immunity necklace. I think they could easily pick up Christina, too, and they'd be pretty unstoppable.

I'm not sure why you are saying that.... he's got that name problem, which is apparently a diagnosed condition, but other than that, he seems like a regular guy with a bit of a big mouth... I know plenty of those.

In other news, in response to a question that Romney's history of flip-flopping will be a problem in the general election, one of his top people said that it's like an etch-a-sketch, and he'll just reinvent himself after the election.You can't make stuff like this up.

I know this has been discussed before, but I'm pretty sure the major game changes are pre-scripted. I believe there are laws about that due to the game show scandals in the 50s. I'm not positive of this because there is leeway for things like medical emergencies and stuff, and technically these aren't game shows, but in this case they clearly wouldn't go all the way to the merge with men vs women. Whenever they've grouped tribes by X, they've mixed them relatively soon. And 12 people left is a common spot for a merge -- 9 jury members, 3 final.

That worked out very nicely. It's so nice to see him gone. And Alicia is in a pretty bad spot right now. All is right in the Survivor world. I feel even worse for Monica now, though... one week away from being back in a good spot.Do people really get to be adults without ever hearing of appendicitis? I asked my son (15) and he said the only way he knows was because I had it a few years ago, he doesn't remember hearing of it any other time.I disagree that this is a bad season, it's very entertaining. Having people to hate and people playing poorly makes for good entertainment. Th

Yeah, if parents are forcing kids to marry people the kid doesn't want to marry at 15, there is a problem. But that's not a bigamy problem, that's something else.

Nancy Pelosi's daughter makes a video about the welfare recipients in her neighborhood

OK, so it looks unanimous on Hannity is bad? Maybe I should watch it and see what I'm missing.Just kidding.

Disagreeing with someone /= they are dishonest.Really.Having said that, I will admit I don't watch these people, none of them. I've seen all of them at one point or another, and from what I've seen of Hannity he is among the most sane -- far better than Maddow, e.g. But it is likely I see a distorted view of all of them, since I basically see the highlight reel version of each of them. I tried watching Maddow one night, though, and wanted to break my TV.

Presumably rape and statutory rape would still be illegal, since those involve forcing people against their will. This is such a patronizing argument, I'm surprised you would even type it. Basically, you are saying "women are too stupid to make decisions about how many spouses their husband should have, so society needs to help these poor, helpless, defenseless women from harming themselves." Why do you have such a low opinion of women?EDIT: I saw your next post about consenting adults, and it seems we basically agree, but I will leave this response anyway... for, um, historical purposes.

Uh, lots of us are fighting against these harmful and immoral laws; it's not really working because the Teeming Masses think the Government Wizard can wave a Magic Health Care Wand and give them something for nothing. But yes, your point is correct. I always heard the best way to bring down a corrupt bureaucracy is to give it its way, and I think in this case, it may be true.