41 Comments

• seanomelb | Jul 02, 2012, 11:46 PM EDT

  maybe you should broaden our horizons I cannot find any references to sea levels dropping due to polar melting. RE dinosaurs and a warm earth well you know the truth.

• BrianO | Jul 01, 2012, 09:26 PM EDT

  need to review your physics, seano.But since you bring it up, How could dinosaurs have roamed the earth? That would require the earth to be much warmer than it is now, and we all know that only human interference can warm the earth.

• seanomelb | Jul 01, 2012, 07:32 PM EDT

  Melting ice lowers sea levels I'm disappointed Briano!Maybe you were been humorous.I sure hope so.Maybe you also believe that dinosaurs roamed the earth with humans ya gotta laugh!!

• BrianO | Jul 01, 2012, 06:05 PM EDT

  Ephraim the guy in flooded basement I'm sure exists, the problem with the seascarers is that they take an aberration in data and extrapolate it to "prove" their end. Anyone who performed high school science experiments will know this is fudging results to fit what you want the conclusion to be. Your version of America relies on bigger and more powerful government to be nice to everyone, alawys seems nice at the beginning put tends to end horribly.

• EphraimKibbey | Jul 01, 2012, 05:25 PM EDT

  @Briano - the guy in the interview didn't seem to think that his house was sinking but I guess that would be an alternative explanation for the fact that the ocean was in his basement or don't you believe in facts. @eiriamach - I agree that my post showed some philosophical wishful thinking but I have found that the KISS principle is important. When you start to see their eyes glazing over, it is time to "Keep It Simple Stupid!" Your facts are resplendent but there are many here who won't read them or acknowledge them let alone believe them. The nation's only hope is a constitutional amendment stating that only people are people with rights and that limiting contributions to elections to reasonable amounts with full disclosure is constitutional followed by a return to a more progressive tax schedule. The one under Clinton worked well then but I fear that too much of the nation's wealth has been stolen by the plutocracy and will need to be repatriated before our economy can function ideally.

• eiriamach | Jul 01, 2012, 03:57 PM EDT

  EphraimK, I like your principle, "we all contribute to our commonwealth based on our ability to do so," but I do not see it working out in practice. The wealthy consume much more in government services, at hidden costs, than the poor--unless the poor grow so large in numbers and the wealthy so few that the balance shifts. We're not yet at that point. Now, someone with $1 million in yearly income requires far more of the services of the FDIC, SEC, TSA, other security and info agencies, regulatory agencies that watch banks and manufacturers for compliance, and enforcement agencies for NAFTA and other commerce treaties. The wealthy are well protected by expensive government services, and they contribute less to their cost than middle- and working-class Americans, who might use food stamps (welfare for corporate farmers) or aid to dependent children when parents are unemployed (unemployment insurance is a benefit they paid into, not "welfare"). That's without mentioning oil depletion allowances, agriculture subsidies, and other tax loopholes. The wealthy have a better "ability" to pay but get gov't benefits galore at the expense of the middle-class. As Reinhold Niebuhr pointed out, sources of power in the economy are covert, so we try to solve economic problems through politics, where power is overt. (But I thought you guys gave up on philosophy?)

• BrianO | Jul 01, 2012, 08:37 AM EDT

  Ephraim there is no rising of sea levels. Read the Constitution it is short and remarkable easy to read. Show me where it says government shall tax people by their ability to pay. As I get ready to celebrate The forth of July, Happy DEPENDENCE day as that is what your party and me thinks your employer strive for.

• EphraimKibbey | Jul 01, 2012, 01:09 AM EDT

  The way our government works is that we all contribute to our commonwealth based on our ability to do so and the government does the big things that no one person is able to do by themselves. For most of us it is stuff like building a bridge in downtown Boston or equiping an army but for the less fortunate among us it is seeing that they get healthcare and a decent education. Since life is one of our inalienable rights, poverty should not be a reason for its loss. It should definitely not be taken away because of the inaction of our government. While I personally think Medicare for All or single payer would be much cheaper (as it cuts out the middle men) I realize that it would result in massive job loses from the health insurance companies as they tried to stay in business on medicare suppliment policies alone. The ACA will actually require them to hire more to handle the new policies being written and it will also increase the need for service providers. Lets phase in Medicare for all by lowering the starting age by five years each year.

• EphraimKibbey | Jul 01, 2012, 12:50 AM EDT

  @Briano - "The larger increase here is caused by a slowing of the gulf stream due to glacial melt fresh water messing up the salinity pump in the North Atlantic." Sorry Briano, I know you are a stickler for detail and I thought my use of "glacial" in that statement would cover the fact that the fresh water was indeed coming from melting glaciers on land. The ocean temperature has also risen and as you are a scientifically astute person, I am sure you are aware that liquids expand when heated. Since the folks on the coast between New York and the Carolinas say the sea level is rising, I will take them at their word as they are there and I am not although the video of the guy standing in the flooded basement of his seaside home was pretty convincing.

• BrianO | Jun 30, 2012, 05:28 PM EDT

  Eamonn I thought I conceeded that point only that it may raise levels, as with all things in nature the systems tend to be self regulating. the forces that melt ice in one region reform in another, Most of the seascarers will find a study that works for them in some part of the world and extrapolate to achieve their goal. Anyone who performs real science is a threat because ultimately they are not about solving or warning of a problem but are about economic control. Just another attack on freedom using simple logic and fear not fact.

• EamonnDublin | Jun 30, 2012, 04:11 PM EDT

  BrianO - Exactly! Now you've got it! Water in the form of ice does indeed take up more space than it does in its liquidised form. But I didn't say "icebergs", I said "iceblocks", meaning ice on land. When that melts into the sea, there is obviously only one thing the sea level can do - rise. Another principle which can be applied in this matter is the one which states that when 5,000 giant gorillas jump into a small lake, the water in the lake rises. Of course, according to Lucas (1843-1916), this phenomenon is not solely confined to gorillas, it can in fact apply also to giraffes, buffalo, horses, crocodiles and sheep (unshorn). Archimides also had something to say about it, but I think he might have got it slightly wrong. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.

• BrianO | Jun 30, 2012, 02:47 PM EDT

  Eamonn, discussing geometry and physics is so much more enjoyable than the philosophy lessons of late, The right angled iceberg is I assume made of ice. This form of H2O takes up more volume than the liquid state of H2O. Fill a glass with ice fill the glass with water, when the ice melts see if it overflows remains the same or is less. Briano. In the winters in massachusetts we have to be careful frozen water pipes, when that happens the same volume of water expands and bursts the pipes.

• EamonnDublin | Jun 30, 2012, 02:04 PM EDT

  My apologies to "PittsburghKid" - I omitted to log in and thus my response to "BrianO" is headed "PittsburghKid" because he was the next to post. It's a quirk of the software. The post is signed off at the end by me. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.

• Pittsburghkid | Jun 30, 2012, 01:39 PM EDT

  Roberts needs his seizure medication adjusted. No need to worry the Tea Party is gearing up for 2012, like it did in 2010. American are going to be called all kinds of names like racist, homophobe, zenophobe, etc, but we will ignore this name calling, and vote like it waa 2010.

• Pittsburghkid | Jun 30, 2012, 11:44 AM EDT

  BrianO - But, using the "square on the hypotenuse theorem" (Pythagoras), the melting ice on the square of the longest side of the iceblock equals the sum of the melting ice on the squares of the other two sides. Therefore, the melting ice from a solid landblock of ice MUST raise the sea level - always, of course, allowing for the fact that the iceblock has to be formed in the shape of a triangle and also must include a right-angled triangle - as most iceblocks indeed are. QED! Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.

• BrianO | Jun 30, 2012, 10:41 AM EDT

  Eamonn, I won't go as far as saying it will raise sea levels as the factors that melt ice also react to the environment in different ways. Most use the intuit thinking that melted ice of course adds to the volume of water and thus raises sea level, this doesn't happen in a vacuum. On the converse, if the oceans are not rising (Dr. Morner) then the ice can't be melting, which I believe is a false statement but using the straight line logic would be logically true.

• EamonnDublin | Jun 30, 2012, 10:31 AM EDT

  BrianO - Thanks for confirming that I am correct. I did NOT say that ALL melting ice raises the sea level - I said melting ice raises the sea level. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.

• eiriamach | Jun 30, 2012, 09:36 AM EDT

  BrianO, Roberts changed his vote late in the game because Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg made him see the light. She argued that the ACA does not replace private enterprise (insurance carriers) with gov't agencies; therefore, there is NO reason to consider it creeping socialism. The horrendous health insurance market needed congressional regulation in the interest of all except the wealthiest Americans, and the ACA IS that regulation! The only other option-- everyone agrees with this analysis-- is a single-payer, gov't-run system, which Roberts would never have voted to uphold since it would REPLACE capitalist commerce with gov't bureaucracy. I've quoted elsewhere on IC Bader's warning, "Aware that a national solution was required, Congress could have taken over the health-insurance market by establishing a tax-and-spend federal program like Social Security. Such a program, commonly referred to as a single-payer system (where the sole payer is the Federal Government), would have left little, if any, room for private enterprise or the States. Instead of going this route, Congress enacted the ACA, a solution that retains a robust role for private insurers and state governments."

• BrianO | Jun 30, 2012, 09:33 AM EDT

  Eamonn Try googling Dr Morner Sweden, or you tube him. He doesn't speak of the properties of ice but on the evidence that the oceans haven't risen in 50 years, big scam. These days with the climate being used to furthur control people, I question all "facts" as they normally are used on one side. If we are talking about stored glacial plates covering land masses that water would add to the system to potentially raise levels. If the melting ice is in the sea such as Ice bergs coastal ice, ice sheets, this would lower levels, Then there is always evaporation rates and weather flows, I'm obviously not a physicist nor do I play one on TV. as to Ephraim, it is very frustrating to see fellow citizens so gleefully giving away their and my freedom.

• eiriamach | Jun 30, 2012, 09:08 AM EDT

  BrianO, you think "if it isn't a tax then roberts couldn't have ruled as he did." I am simply saying that although Roberts voted correctly, his reasoning, his opinion in the case, was way off! It does not stretch the commerce clause to consider the ACA a congressional effort to restore rationality to a greed-ridden system that favors insurance companies' huge profits at the expense of the health and financial status of middle-class Americans. If anything, Congress waited far too long to act on the health insurance problems; too many who couldn't afford insurance have died waiting for service in emergency rooms, and too many have impoverished their families to pay to keep their un-insurable loved ones with chronic diseases alive. If ever there was an interstate commerce problem that threatened the nation with economic crash and widespread poverty, health care is that problem. Of course the commerce clause accommodates ACA, and the fine is not a tax, despite Roberts' finagling! Roberts was working for his conservative buddies when he tried to keep Obama's hands off the interstate commerce justification. But subsequent cases need not rely on Roberts' part of the Court's decision; the other 4 Justices got it right, and their opinions will guide subsequent cases.

• EamonnDublin | Jun 30, 2012, 05:10 AM EDT

  "BrianO" - Where do you get it from? Firstly, may I state clearly that I am not a believer in humans causing climate change to any degree. Now, on to the point of my letter ("Where do you get it from"?) the fact of the matter is that melting ice DOES cause sea levels to rise. Now, are you listening? Melting ice DOES, DOES, DOES cause sea levels to rise. So, no justification to call Ephraim "dopey". Except maybe for his last throwaway about Fox. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.

• BrianO | Jun 30, 2012, 01:03 AM EDT

  Ephraim you are getting dopier by the minute. Ice melting will drop the sea level not raise it, climate changes, it always has. Next you will blame your fellow citizens because time changes. I don't expect seano to understand he was born in Ireland and emigrated to australia, but how does an American born citizen learn to sell his country down the drain?

• EphraimKibbey | Jun 29, 2012, 11:52 PM EDT

  @shop tom - I like your suggestion about taxing those who buy gas guzzlers. Did you see the news tonight about the sea level rise along the US east coast. 2.8 inches in New York to 3.4 in North Carolina. The larger increase here is caused by a slowing of the gulf stream due to glacial melt fresh water messing up the salinity pump in the North Atlantic. By the way it is that very current that brings Ireland and Western Europe its balmy breezes. When the current pump stops, it will get rather chilly. Maybe we should do something about it before its too late. Just a thought. Fox and Friends probably doesn't believe in the Gulf Stream either.

• Scrivner | Jun 29, 2012, 10:52 PM EDT

  Let us pity our poor Canadian brethern, pretty soon they won't have convenient, high quality immediate access to healthcare!

• McNamara31 | Jun 29, 2012, 09:35 PM EDT

  shop tom Giving people a fair and equal right to health care is a moral issue. What is arrogant or Socialist about that? Do you realize we are the only industrialized nation that does not provide healthcare?

• shop tom | Jun 29, 2012, 09:27 PM EDT

  If Obama wins re-election, the Constitution is in grave danger from this arrogant, socialist failure that is Obama. america is teetering on the edge of losing the very core of it's strength.

• shop tom | Jun 29, 2012, 09:18 PM EDT

  I expectd Roberts to use brains and common sense. Only a complete idiot would give a green light to a government imposing a "tax" on something a person does not purchase. What's next? a "tax" imosed on those who do not buy fuel efficient cars---even if they don't even wish to purchase a car? Shamefully inane is the only way to describe Robert's decision.

• pilib04 | Jun 29, 2012, 07:44 PM EDT

  What did you expect from a good Irish Catholic like Chief Justice John Roberts.

• BrianO | Jun 29, 2012, 07:26 PM EDT

  Eiramach if it isn't a tax then roberts couldn't have ruled as he did. words mean things, and logic is different than law. in fact roberts had to coerce a portion of the testimony to hear an argument that the fee was a tax. Government in the old days (yesterday) restrained by the constitution couldn't confiscate a persons money for not buying a private industries product. Congress does have the power to tax however. That is why this point is important and cannot be changed, without this stretching of the law roberts couldn't have sided with the leftists on the court. whether it ends up with Obama losing or not it is a bad precedent that will be mis used in the future.

• seanomelb | Jun 29, 2012, 07:21 PM EDT

  A win for all Americans and POTUS will now serve four more years. The Fox lie sheet interviewed Malkin,Bachmann and Palin and the claim "their" man on the supreme court acted unconstitutionally but what would that trio witches know about constitutional law.There no pleasing the teaparty or the evangelical extreme GOP. Read the decision and weep.

• eiriamach | Jun 29, 2012, 06:21 PM EDT

  Cherylkd trots out the same tired old lies from the USCCB! I'm beginning to think the ability to recognize or tell the truth is incompatible with 21st century Catholicism. It seems I've said this dozens of times, but the Catholics insist-- without ever citing any shred of evidence whatever-- that the Affordable Care Act allows abortions! When the Affordable Care Act was making its way through Congress, it met strenuous opposition from the Catholic bishops. It did not become law until Obama gave them a guarantee that it would not pay for abortions. See Executive Order 13.535 (Mar 24, 2010), which specifically applies the Hyde Amendment to the ACA and FORBIDS any federal funding of abortion services or abortifacients. The ACA also contains the Stupak–Pitts Amendment, which prohibits federal money "to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion" (Nov 7, 2009). But what can we expect from someone who thinks life starts **before** conception? Cheryld hears voices alright, but they are not heavenly voices! Mental health check-up time, Cheryl.

• EamonnDublin | Jun 29, 2012, 06:07 PM EDT

  Chief Justice Roberts is very obviously not unintelligent. He has a very shrewd, logical brain. It is my own belief that he has purposely driven a stake into the heart of Obama and his team and has gone a long way towards ensuring Obama's defeat in November. In the full knowledge that a President Romney will repeal the Healthcare bill, Chief Justice Roberts has ensured two major things - firstly the defeat of Obama and, secondly, that the Healthcare folly will never get off the ground. Congratulations to a very clever and intelligent man. Of course, Obamarama is too busy campaigning to have a clue what's going on. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.

• hollabackgurl | Jun 29, 2012, 04:29 PM EDT

  "God said...?"I have lived a long time on this earth and I have never heard God, Krishna, Allah, Vishnu, or any other deity say anything ever. EVEN WHEN YOU ADD CAPITALS LIKE THIS FOR EMPHASIS, SEE, you can't tell me He's been chatty lately.

• Cheryld | Jun 29, 2012, 03:04 PM EDT

  GOD SAID" I knew you BEFORE you were formed in your mothers womb'. That means life starts even before conception to all you Catholics who dont read your GOD'S instructions. SO now we are forced to fund ABORTIONS with ROBERTS "catholic" decison. Next time he wants to be a catholic or an AMERICAN...tell him to decide who is more powerful for eternity. Tell him THIS IRISH has disowned him as an accomplis to the murders of hundreds of thousands of infants. ON that ONE issue he AND ALL CATHOLICS should have voted NO.

• mayoman | Jun 29, 2012, 02:58 PM EDT

  Thank God Justice Roberts had the good sense to do the right thing.

• EphraimKibbey | Jun 29, 2012, 02:52 PM EDT

  @TheOldPerfessor - The US doesn't just pay a bit more either. We pay OVER twice as much per capita than any of the other top six industrialized countries. So if we are paying twice as much, it seems like there is a lot of room for those insurance premiums to fall once everyone is contributing their fair share. In August those of us not trying to scam the system will get a rebate from our insurance company thanks to the ACA. This will also help to drive down premiums because the companies can't keep what they over charge us. Now add in the good old capitalist pressures of competition in the health exchanges in 2014 and we may be talking real savings.

• Bythebay | Jun 29, 2012, 01:32 PM EDT

  eiriamach, I hope you're wrong but if you're right then the US and its system of checks and balances is a total failure.

• Bythebay | Jun 29, 2012, 01:29 PM EDT

  the US has been attempting to have universal healthcare since FDR and failed. The most notable furor about it was when Hilary Rodham was assigned the task by Billy early in his first term and was so villified it all had to be stopped almost immediately. It will be interesting to see how it's actually administered and if it actually does what its supporters claim it will.

• joan1954 | Jun 29, 2012, 01:13 PM EDT

  From a reading of American history there was anger when FDR signed the Social Security Act and when Johnson signed the medicare act. I was against this but for those of us with high premiums if they would cut the high premiums and stop health insurance fat cat CEO's from their bonuses then maybe this might work. Make it affordable for all but this being the USA and private business just won't happen. Mind you some of this is tongue in cheek.

• TheOldPerfessor | Jun 29, 2012, 12:43 PM EDT

  All of Rupert's Rangers believe that they are getting something for themselves by throwing 30 million Americans under the bus. Actually, the working poor have to use the emergency room as their first line of health care. The hospital has to help heal them even though they can't pay. It's the most expensive kind of health care and somebody's paying for it. Let's see - it's not the working poor. Who could it be? If you look at the facts, America is paying far more for health than the rest of the civilized world in countries where they make sure that everybody gets health care.

• eiriamach | Jun 29, 2012, 09:35 AM EDT

  Probably, Roberts voted on crass political motives to prevent a public perception of the Court as the GOP cheering squad. The fine paid by the uninsured is not a tax even if the IRS collects it. It is a small contribution to the cost that we all bear for health care for the uninsured. The uninsured will still be getting theirs cheaply. But they can boast that Obama has not forced them to buy something they don't want. They'd rather freeload than pay their fair share. That's what freedom means to the GOP, right?