Not really. That is a funny little comment that has no basis in fact or reality, and is typically spewed by people with left leaning bias in the first place.
Reality has no bias, You don't work, you go hungry. Unless you apply a left leaning bias to this which applies "and hunger is wrong" qualitative view point. The moment one applies a judgment to "reality" their view of reality is altered.
The eye altering, alters all - William Blake.
The point being, every one of your views that views reality with left leaning bias, alters that reality for you, so that it appears to be left leaning.
And the fact that I have to explain how reality has no bias, only proves my point further.
I have several passwords I use. Sites that require accounts for participation get one that I don't care if it gets out in the wild. No big loss. People posting as me is mildly amusing.
I have another password for systems I'm in charge of, that function like those I participate in in the first example. It would suck if that got out. Those systems are few, and you'd have to personally know me to know what they were.
I have secure passwords for each of the highly sensitive accounts (banks and such) that are not shared between accounts. IF one of those gets out, I'm screwed for that one institution, but nowhere else.
Ergonomics is for people who sit in one spot all day. By moving around to different places, being able to work anywhere, means that we're not in any one place long enough to get uncomfortable sitting on the rock hard chair or whatever.
Don't miss understand me, ergonomics is important, especially to stave off Repetitive Stress orthopedic issues. I'm rarely in a place long enough to notice a nice chair or monitor that is adjusted perfectly for me. Trust me, I know what it is like to be uncomfortable (6'5", 290lbs) because I just don't fit in most places. At home, I have a couple comfy chairs and a nice couch, but often I'll prefer laying on the hard floor to watch a movie, as it is much more comfortable for me than to sit in chairs that were designed for people foot smaller and hundred pounds less.
They are those things because they are a Windows company. That is their bread and butter, and it is killing them. Everything they do is designed to protect "Windows". Windows that are shuttered all the time are worthless.
So you're saying that if you go to Iran, and have sex with your girlfriend while you're there, it is right and just for you (or more likely, just her) to be stoned to death, because the law of the land
Yes, exactly. I may not like it, which is why I won't have sex with my girlfriend in Iran.
I know, it is hard for people like you to be able to keep your dick in your pants even when your life is at stake. Some of us don't have that problem.
Either laws matter, or they don't. If you don't like a law in a land you're visiting, then don't visit or go and obey the laws of the land, or expect the consequences. It doesn't matter what YOU think in Iran, really it doesn't. They don't care and neither should you.
You think it is screwed up system, perhaps you'd agree we need to invade huh?
Tell me, name one thing you've done that's been half so valorous as what Assange has accomplished over the last few years?
Assange didn't do anything. You want to praise someone, praise the traitor/patriot the gave him the documents. Assange is sitting pretty with all the glory while the real traitor/patriot is gonna get hung or shot for his gift to the glory hound Assange.
Either that guy is a traitor, or a patriot. If you think that taking documents he was trusted with makes him a hero, say so.
Assange is not American, so I don't really give a rats ass what he thinks of my country. He's just another foreign douche who hates America, they are a dime a dozen. The only reason he doesn't pick on the REALLY bad places is because he knows he won't live if he does. He'd just disappear or get a surprise dose of radiation having a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
Microsoft is in the market to sell WINDOWS products, not technology products. Their bread and butter is tied to WINDOWS, not technology. The difference is Focus.
My comment comes from a story from 100 or so years ago, when a guy running a Railroad said he was in the "railroad business". While that is true, it was short sighted. The business he was in was Transportation, not railroading. Along comes cars and trucks and railroads are... not nearly as dominant as they once were, because of short sighted thinking. After all they are in the Railroad business.
Microsoft is in the Windows business. It is the same short sighted view that is making losing market share as the internet, cell phones and smart devices leave windows on the desktop.
Microsoft's forays into other areas are all driven to drive market back to windows. Xbox, Zune, Windows mobile/WINCE, is all to leverage peripheral markets back to Windows.
Rather that realizing they are a Technology company they keep trying to sell us that they are a Windows company. Windows is their product, the world is leaving them to it, and moving on.
Why haven't MS developed a touch-based shell for Windows 7?
Because Windows 7 wasn't designed for touch based screens, except as an after thought. That's why.
If Microsoft was smart, they'd rip out a whole new OS based on touch screen that wasn't WINDOWS anything. Just a kickass OS that was designed for touch screens. THEN they could bolt on Windows compatibility shell on top for a "desktop", perhaps something like WINE. Hell, adopting WINE would be such an awesome move by Microsoft at this point, I wonder why they haven't. WINE is such a great abstraction from the underlying OS that Microsoft should adopt it, for that one purpose only.
You suffer from the same problem Microsoft does. Your basic assumption is that Microsoft is a WINDOWS company, not a Technology Company. I don't want a device so bloated it has two separate interfaces, I don't need more bloat from Microsoft. My Droid Phone has more power than a computer from 10 years ago, and does more with less than typical desktop does. It is limited in ways that I don't care about when I'm on the road, and I don't want the bloat of all the crap I have to run on my laptop just to be connected to the Corporate Servers, when I'm not connected.
So, what you're asking for is something I don't want. No thank you.
Microsoft is not a technology company. Microsoft is a Windows company. Until Microsoft realizes that is a mistake, they are doomed to keep trying to shoehorn Windows OS where it doesn't belong, or create "me too" products to leverage Windows OS (Zune). Even the damn Xbox was designed with Windows in mind.
Libertarians believe that if wrong has occurred, then compensation is due. If you can prove your point, preponderance of evidence, then the role of government, and rule of law is preserved. In this case, assuming you can prove the bee die off is at least partially caused by a pesticide made by Bayer, the lawsuit would allow for the stripping of profits and assets to compensate those that have been harmed.
And since I'm for the Corporate Death Penalty this would be an good type of case for instituting such.
The free market cannot cause harm, or else it is not free. And while the asshat liberals love to paint market freedom with anarchy brush strokes, and it gets repeated, it is no wonder people who are reasonable like yourself think similarly. However, you're just as wrong, because you don't understand libertarianism or the idea of a free market that does no harm.
We do not have a free market. In fact, what we have is a complete slave system of governmental corporate oligarchy, that pretends to be "free" but is not. If we brought back as system where harm caused is punished severely by restitution payments to society, you'd see a change in behavior by those involved. In fact, we could probably get rid of a great deal of stupid laws that has brought us the current nanny state.
The problem in this case is the EPA has given approval to the pesticide, and thus given Bayer an out legally. It was approved! You can't sue the EPA for it, you can't sue Bayer for it, and we have to go to our masters, and pray to them to stop using the damn stuff. EPA, CSPC, FDA and all those other government agencies aren't doing their job, and people want to give them more power, to not do their job to get more power (wash, rinse, repeat).
"If I put a bottle on the table with a skull and crossbones on it and say 'This is poison. it will destroy your health, family, marriage, and ultimately kill you' and you push me out of the way and down the bottle? Well then frankly your are too stupid to live. Why should I have to spend billions building a fence around the bottle and cages to put you in, just to keep you from drinking it?"
The nanny state is perpetuated on both sides of the (D)/(R) isles. It isn't a "left" or "right" issue, if you understand the nanny state cannot and willnot ever protect you. Rather it will enslave you. Freedom means freedom to fail. Failure has to be an option, if success is a goal.
The statement gives the ultimate in "epic fail". Or as I sometimes like to say... "Stupid should hurt"
Lets stop trying to protect people from every conceivable boogie man, okay?
Galileo was considered to be a crackpot to the then establishment.
Point being, just because someone seems to be a crackpot doesn't mean they are. It may just mean the status quo doesn't like their opinion, and labels them "crackpot" in an attempt to dismiss them.
I think Nancy Pelosi is a crackpot, but somehow she keeps getting elected. Have you seen some of the crap she says? It doesn't say much for the party that put her into the Speaker of the House position.
Don't get me wrong, Behnor has the same problems, so I'm not picking on (D) only. Just trying to get you to realize that one person's crackpot is another's "less sensationalist perspective"
My distaste for Mr Moore is that HE lies to prove that US lies. Lies begetting lies doesn't make for truth. Your support of Mr Moore doesn't support the truth anymore than blindly supporting our country does.
Our country is great, not because it lies, but rather because we realize that it is the best damn country (or at least was) in spite of all the warts, scars and problems.Mr Moore wants to toss the baby out with the bath water, because the baby caused the water to be dirty, instead of realizing the water is supposed to be dirty, and the baby is supposed to be clean. Baby's get dirty, need to change the water often. We don't need to kill the baby because it keeps getting dirty.
Of course, the dirty water ends up in the water table and pollution and so on, and the only way to fix that is to go to the Georgia Guidestones and bow down and worship at the Elitist agenda.
Do you tell your wife her stretchmarks are ugly? Why not, you got nothing to hide, right? You tell your husband that his dick is tiny? Why not you got nothing to hide.
The problem here is that it isn't "hiding" per se, it is that discretion is the better part of valor, and people like Assange has no need for valor, except when it suits them and them only. It doesn't surprise me that he is accused of unsafe sexual practices, against the wishes of the women he had sex wtih.
Which happens to be a crime in Sweden. Either we respect laws in lands not our own, while we are there, or we will soon be under Sharia law as the Islamists impose their values on us everywhere. In that case Assange and the women would have already been stoned to death.
Assange is NOT above the law, even if you agree with his whole Wikileaks organization.
What exactly in the California Constitutional Amendment is a violation of US Constitutional?
Equal protection? This is gonna open up a whole can of worms that the gay marriage proponents are also against. Say like defining marriage as being two people, and not many? What one person call arbitrary another person calls discrimination.
No one is taking your kidney without your permission
Not yet. I'm still armed. But I was making a point, which you missed. Taking from one, to give to another to secure a "right" is not a right. I view forcing anyone to do anything so that another may have a "right" is the same as taking a kidney from me without my permission, so someone else can live.
Should the right to have Life be dependent on the money that you have? If so perhaps the liberty and happiness is the same (well it seems to be that way)
Life doesn't depend on anyone else, isn't guaranteed by others. Life is also not fair. Some people live long who shouldn't (Charles Manson) and others live a short life who should have had a long one (My murdered friends).
Liberty is defended by our US military, a voluntary military, this service is provided to all Americans.
Liberty should be defended by all. Military defends us against foreign threats (supposed to anyway). This is what I'm trying to do here. To define what a "right" is in terms that you might grasp. Taking from one is an assault on Liberty, in the same way that taking a kidney from you to save a life is.
The pursuit of happiness is helped by our public school system and other social services, again provided to every American.
These are social contracts. And if you want to say that Health Care is a SOCIAL CONTRACT, by all means, feel free. I won't argue that. I'm arguing that it is NOT a right. Health care, education and social programs are all privileges we have because we live in a wealthy, technological country. They don't have any such thing in Sub Sahara Africa, or the back jungles of Brazil. To the extent that rights exists in these places, they exist here in the US. To the extent we cannot provide "Cat Scans" in back jungles of Brazil, they are not a right.
if you feel that someone else should die from a curable illness so you can keep a kidney just say so.
Funny how you make my point for me, you just don't put it in terms that are objectionable on the surface.
Please define what a "human right" is, in terms that can be applied to anyone that is stranded on an island all by themselves.
My point, a RIGHT cannot be SECURED by the TAKING from one, and GIVING to another. Rights are SELF evident, meaning they don't require anything from anyone else.
If, however, you believe that a RIGHT can be secured by the TAKING from another, then I suggest that you lock your kidneys up, because someone's right to LIFE might require them to TAKE your kidney, regardless of how you feel about it. If you can demand of me to give to another to secure a "right", then society has the same ability to do the same thing to you in ways that is most unpleasant.
Somehow, I doubt you'll understand the basic concept here because you want something (thing) you don't have, and are willing to use government to give it to you. Health care is a THING, not a right. It cost money to produce, people to work for it, technology and skills to enhance it.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
In Brief terms, this happens all the time, usually by Left Leaning judges who don't like a particular law. See the California constitutional law stating that marriage shall be defined as between one man, and one woman, which is being overturned as we speak, but a judge (or panel of judges), on the grounds that it is unconstitutional (think about it).
The problem is left leaning people only want the judiciary to support left leaning causes, and this isn't one of them. So while they are for judicial activism for their causes, when it appears the opposite, they freak about "Republican" judges not listening to the will of the people.
Ask a leftist about this overturning of something they want, and they will say it is judicial activism and whatnot, but ask about overturning a law supporting marriage between a man and a woman, and you'll get a different answer. Trying to get them to explain why a judge can do one, and not another, and you'll have an interesting view on their heads exploding.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Either we have a Constitution, and it applies, or it does not. Can you tell me, exactly where in the Constitution, Congress has the authority to require people to spend any money on anything, save for taxes?
If you clamor about the Commerce Clause I'll scream that Health Insurance is NOT interstate commerce, it is specifically NOT interstate. I can't buy health insurance from Nevada.
But that is besides the point, you want universally bad health care for everyone, so Constitution be damned.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. That is a funny little comment that has no basis in fact or reality, and is typically spewed by people with left leaning bias in the first place.
Reality has no bias, You don't work, you go hungry. Unless you apply a left leaning bias to this which applies "and hunger is wrong" qualitative view point. The moment one applies a judgment to "reality" their view of reality is altered.
The eye altering, alters all - William Blake.
The point being, every one of your views that views reality with left leaning bias, alters that reality for you, so that it appears to be left leaning.
And the fact that I have to explain how reality has no bias, only proves my point further.
I have several passwords I use. Sites that require accounts for participation get one that I don't care if it gets out in the wild. No big loss. People posting as me is mildly amusing.
I have another password for systems I'm in charge of, that function like those I participate in in the first example. It would suck if that got out. Those systems are few, and you'd have to personally know me to know what they were.
I have secure passwords for each of the highly sensitive accounts (banks and such) that are not shared between accounts. IF one of those gets out, I'm screwed for that one institution, but nowhere else.
Ergonomics is for people who sit in one spot all day. By moving around to different places, being able to work anywhere, means that we're not in any one place long enough to get uncomfortable sitting on the rock hard chair or whatever.
Don't miss understand me, ergonomics is important, especially to stave off Repetitive Stress orthopedic issues. I'm rarely in a place long enough to notice a nice chair or monitor that is adjusted perfectly for me. Trust me, I know what it is like to be uncomfortable (6'5", 290lbs) because I just don't fit in most places. At home, I have a couple comfy chairs and a nice couch, but often I'll prefer laying on the hard floor to watch a movie, as it is much more comfortable for me than to sit in chairs that were designed for people foot smaller and hundred pounds less.
Read Time F'in Magazine (RTFM) ??
They are those things because they are a Windows company. That is their bread and butter, and it is killing them. Everything they do is designed to protect "Windows". Windows that are shuttered all the time are worthless.
Yes, exactly. I may not like it, which is why I won't have sex with my girlfriend in Iran.
I know, it is hard for people like you to be able to keep your dick in your pants even when your life is at stake. Some of us don't have that problem.
Either laws matter, or they don't. If you don't like a law in a land you're visiting, then don't visit or go and obey the laws of the land, or expect the consequences. It doesn't matter what YOU think in Iran, really it doesn't. They don't care and neither should you.
You think it is screwed up system, perhaps you'd agree we need to invade huh?
Assange didn't do anything. You want to praise someone, praise the traitor/patriot the gave him the documents. Assange is sitting pretty with all the glory while the real traitor/patriot is gonna get hung or shot for his gift to the glory hound Assange.
Either that guy is a traitor, or a patriot. If you think that taking documents he was trusted with makes him a hero, say so.
Assange is not American, so I don't really give a rats ass what he thinks of my country. He's just another foreign douche who hates America, they are a dime a dozen. The only reason he doesn't pick on the REALLY bad places is because he knows he won't live if he does. He'd just disappear or get a surprise dose of radiation having a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
Microsoft is in the market to sell WINDOWS products, not technology products. Their bread and butter is tied to WINDOWS, not technology. The difference is Focus.
My comment comes from a story from 100 or so years ago, when a guy running a Railroad said he was in the "railroad business". While that is true, it was short sighted. The business he was in was Transportation, not railroading. Along comes cars and trucks and railroads are ... not nearly as dominant as they once were, because of short sighted thinking. After all they are in the Railroad business.
Microsoft is in the Windows business. It is the same short sighted view that is making losing market share as the internet, cell phones and smart devices leave windows on the desktop.
Microsoft's forays into other areas are all driven to drive market back to windows. Xbox, Zune, Windows mobile/WINCE, is all to leverage peripheral markets back to Windows.
Rather that realizing they are a Technology company they keep trying to sell us that they are a Windows company. Windows is their product, the world is leaving them to it, and moving on.
Because Windows 7 wasn't designed for touch based screens, except as an after thought. That's why.
If Microsoft was smart, they'd rip out a whole new OS based on touch screen that wasn't WINDOWS anything. Just a kickass OS that was designed for touch screens. THEN they could bolt on Windows compatibility shell on top for a "desktop", perhaps something like WINE. Hell, adopting WINE would be such an awesome move by Microsoft at this point, I wonder why they haven't. WINE is such a great abstraction from the underlying OS that Microsoft should adopt it, for that one purpose only.
You suffer from the same problem Microsoft does. Your basic assumption is that Microsoft is a WINDOWS company, not a Technology Company. I don't want a device so bloated it has two separate interfaces, I don't need more bloat from Microsoft. My Droid Phone has more power than a computer from 10 years ago, and does more with less than typical desktop does. It is limited in ways that I don't care about when I'm on the road, and I don't want the bloat of all the crap I have to run on my laptop just to be connected to the Corporate Servers, when I'm not connected.
So, what you're asking for is something I don't want. No thank you.
Microsoft is not a technology company. Microsoft is a Windows company. Until Microsoft realizes that is a mistake, they are doomed to keep trying to shoehorn Windows OS where it doesn't belong, or create "me too" products to leverage Windows OS (Zune). Even the damn Xbox was designed with Windows in mind.
Wrong.
Libertarians believe that if wrong has occurred, then compensation is due. If you can prove your point, preponderance of evidence, then the role of government, and rule of law is preserved. In this case, assuming you can prove the bee die off is at least partially caused by a pesticide made by Bayer, the lawsuit would allow for the stripping of profits and assets to compensate those that have been harmed.
And since I'm for the Corporate Death Penalty this would be an good type of case for instituting such.
The free market cannot cause harm, or else it is not free. And while the asshat liberals love to paint market freedom with anarchy brush strokes, and it gets repeated, it is no wonder people who are reasonable like yourself think similarly. However, you're just as wrong, because you don't understand libertarianism or the idea of a free market that does no harm.
We do not have a free market. In fact, what we have is a complete slave system of governmental corporate oligarchy, that pretends to be "free" but is not. If we brought back as system where harm caused is punished severely by restitution payments to society, you'd see a change in behavior by those involved. In fact, we could probably get rid of a great deal of stupid laws that has brought us the current nanny state.
The problem in this case is the EPA has given approval to the pesticide, and thus given Bayer an out legally. It was approved! You can't sue the EPA for it, you can't sue Bayer for it, and we have to go to our masters, and pray to them to stop using the damn stuff. EPA, CSPC, FDA and all those other government agencies aren't doing their job, and people want to give them more power, to not do their job to get more power (wash, rinse, repeat).
The nanny state is perpetuated on both sides of the (D)/(R) isles. It isn't a "left" or "right" issue, if you understand the nanny state cannot and willnot ever protect you. Rather it will enslave you. Freedom means freedom to fail. Failure has to be an option, if success is a goal.
The statement gives the ultimate in "epic fail". Or as I sometimes like to say ... "Stupid should hurt"
Lets stop trying to protect people from every conceivable boogie man, okay?
Galileo was considered to be a crackpot to the then establishment.
Point being, just because someone seems to be a crackpot doesn't mean they are. It may just mean the status quo doesn't like their opinion, and labels them "crackpot" in an attempt to dismiss them.
I think Nancy Pelosi is a crackpot, but somehow she keeps getting elected. Have you seen some of the crap she says? It doesn't say much for the party that put her into the Speaker of the House position.
Don't get me wrong, Behnor has the same problems, so I'm not picking on (D) only. Just trying to get you to realize that one person's crackpot is another's "less sensationalist perspective"
We the People, get the government we deserve. It is the worst form of governance, except for all the others.
My distaste for Mr Moore is that HE lies to prove that US lies. Lies begetting lies doesn't make for truth. Your support of Mr Moore doesn't support the truth anymore than blindly supporting our country does.
Our country is great, not because it lies, but rather because we realize that it is the best damn country (or at least was) in spite of all the warts, scars and problems.Mr Moore wants to toss the baby out with the bath water, because the baby caused the water to be dirty, instead of realizing the water is supposed to be dirty, and the baby is supposed to be clean. Baby's get dirty, need to change the water often. We don't need to kill the baby because it keeps getting dirty.
Of course, the dirty water ends up in the water table and pollution and so on, and the only way to fix that is to go to the Georgia Guidestones and bow down and worship at the Elitist agenda.
Do you tell your wife her stretchmarks are ugly? Why not, you got nothing to hide, right? You tell your husband that his dick is tiny? Why not you got nothing to hide.
The problem here is that it isn't "hiding" per se, it is that discretion is the better part of valor, and people like Assange has no need for valor, except when it suits them and them only. It doesn't surprise me that he is accused of unsafe sexual practices, against the wishes of the women he had sex wtih.
Which happens to be a crime in Sweden. Either we respect laws in lands not our own, while we are there, or we will soon be under Sharia law as the Islamists impose their values on us everywhere. In that case Assange and the women would have already been stoned to death.
Assange is NOT above the law, even if you agree with his whole Wikileaks organization.
It is the nutjob Socialists commenting on Wikileaks that bring out the nutjob libertarians. ;)
What exactly in the California Constitutional Amendment is a violation of US Constitutional?
Equal protection? This is gonna open up a whole can of worms that the gay marriage proponents are also against. Say like defining marriage as being two people, and not many? What one person call arbitrary another person calls discrimination.
Thank YOU!
RANDOM indeed
Not yet. I'm still armed. But I was making a point, which you missed. Taking from one, to give to another to secure a "right" is not a right. I view forcing anyone to do anything so that another may have a "right" is the same as taking a kidney from me without my permission, so someone else can live.
Life doesn't depend on anyone else, isn't guaranteed by others. Life is also not fair. Some people live long who shouldn't (Charles Manson) and others live a short life who should have had a long one (My murdered friends).
Liberty should be defended by all. Military defends us against foreign threats (supposed to anyway). This is what I'm trying to do here. To define what a "right" is in terms that you might grasp. Taking from one is an assault on Liberty, in the same way that taking a kidney from you to save a life is.
These are social contracts. And if you want to say that Health Care is a SOCIAL CONTRACT, by all means, feel free. I won't argue that. I'm arguing that it is NOT a right. Health care, education and social programs are all privileges we have because we live in a wealthy, technological country. They don't have any such thing in Sub Sahara Africa, or the back jungles of Brazil. To the extent that rights exists in these places, they exist here in the US. To the extent we cannot provide "Cat Scans" in back jungles of Brazil, they are not a right.
Funny how you make my point for me, you just don't put it in terms that are objectionable on the surface.
Please define what a "human right" is, in terms that can be applied to anyone that is stranded on an island all by themselves.
My point, a RIGHT cannot be SECURED by the TAKING from one, and GIVING to another. Rights are SELF evident, meaning they don't require anything from anyone else.
If, however, you believe that a RIGHT can be secured by the TAKING from another, then I suggest that you lock your kidneys up, because someone's right to LIFE might require them to TAKE your kidney, regardless of how you feel about it. If you can demand of me to give to another to secure a "right", then society has the same ability to do the same thing to you in ways that is most unpleasant.
Somehow, I doubt you'll understand the basic concept here because you want something (thing) you don't have, and are willing to use government to give it to you. Health care is a THING, not a right. It cost money to produce, people to work for it, technology and skills to enhance it.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
It is Constitutional because it is for your own good - Big Brother.
In Brief terms, this happens all the time, usually by Left Leaning judges who don't like a particular law. See the California constitutional law stating that marriage shall be defined as between one man, and one woman, which is being overturned as we speak, but a judge (or panel of judges), on the grounds that it is unconstitutional (think about it).
The problem is left leaning people only want the judiciary to support left leaning causes, and this isn't one of them. So while they are for judicial activism for their causes, when it appears the opposite, they freak about "Republican" judges not listening to the will of the people.
Ask a leftist about this overturning of something they want, and they will say it is judicial activism and whatnot, but ask about overturning a law supporting marriage between a man and a woman, and you'll get a different answer. Trying to get them to explain why a judge can do one, and not another, and you'll have an interesting view on their heads exploding.
Either we have a Constitution, and it applies, or it does not. Can you tell me, exactly where in the Constitution, Congress has the authority to require people to spend any money on anything, save for taxes?
If you clamor about the Commerce Clause I'll scream that Health Insurance is NOT interstate commerce, it is specifically NOT interstate. I can't buy health insurance from Nevada.
But that is besides the point, you want universally bad health care for everyone, so Constitution be damned.