Judge Vinson wrote “The problem with the (Obamacare) requirement that individuals buy health insurance is that it penalizes them for not engaging in activity.
This is one of the main arguments against Obamacare. There is an apparent dumb ass named Daniel Fisher who writes in part: “(mandating) purchase (of healthcare) is a bedrock argument of the Obamacare foes, and it must tiptoe around some inconvenient facts of daily life such as state car insurance mandates…..”
This is a backwards argument from Liberals which may be successful only with 8 year old and morons,….but a rational person can’t compare driving a 3,000 lb plus motor vehicle with mandated liability insurance is apples and oranges different from requiring businesses to provide healthcare with the mandated Obamacare requirements, which have greatly driven up prices. And also much different from requiring an individual to purchase healthcare or be fined (or maybe imprisioned in a FEMA concentration camp?),….sorry, I just had to put the FEMA reference in for all my conspiracy buff readers.
And as you know, the Obamacare mandate is only for Conservatives and Republican, or otherwise businesses that don’t contribute to Democrat Campaign coffers, since the Unions, AARP and other leftist organizations have received waivers from the mandate. Of course, this is another bribe, just like what was offered Nebraska and Louisiana.
In any event, good news that yet another Judge has viewed Obamacare through the prism of the Constitution. Still, the appeal has to go to the Supreme Court. Where the U.S. Constitution cannot help but prevail.