Topic: SCOTUS 2012: The Grand Finale

[Pandora]

Ginsberg, whew.  She wants to conduct a "salvage" operation instead of a condemnation.  What she wants to do is have the Court rewrite the law.   

[Pandora]

After the end of the hearing, Senators gathered for a press conference.  This is Rubio's portion.  At 1:38, he switches to Spanish.

Sen. Rubio Discusses Supreme Court's Review Of ObamaCare

[Sectionhand]

Ginsberg, whew.  She wants to conduct a "salvage" operation instead of a condemnation.  What she wants to do is have the Court rewrite the law.  

What's most interesting to me is the fact that the liberal justices and media completely ignore the fact that a majority of Americans consistantly made it clear that they never wanted this monstrosity to become law in the first place .

[Libertas]

Ginsberg, whew.  She wants to conduct a "salvage" operation instead of a condemnation.  What she wants to do is have the Court rewrite the law.  

What's most interesting to me is the fact that the liberal justices and media completely ignore the fact that a majority of Americans consistantly made it clear that they never wanted this monstrosity to become law in the first place .

But the Left views "the people" as stupid, so what the vast majority says is discounted and such bills are passed under dubious means to get around those stupid troublemakers!

Oh, speaking of stupid, nobody can out-do The Regime!

The Obama administration is now referring to Obamacare as a “bi-partisan bill” and calling the unpopular individual mandate “a Republican idea,” following three days of tough questioning by the Supreme Court.

“The Affordable Care Act is a bipartisan plan and one that we think is constitutional,” Deputy White House press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters on Wednesday afternoon.

No Republican voted for the Affordable Care Act on final passage.

He also referred to the individual mandate as the “individual responsibility” clause of the bill, in an attempt to distance the administration from the term individual mandate.

“The administration remains confident that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional; one of the reasons for that is that the original personal responsibility clause…was a conservative idea,” he said.
http://freebeacon.com/white-house-tries-to-rebrand-mandate/

You can stick your rebranding!  

Nobody is going to eat your candy-sprinkled turd!

[Libertas]

This is good, as good a supporting argument to junk the whole damn thing as there is!

http://freebeacon.com/scalia-likens-obamacare-to-cruel-and-unusual-punishment/

Cruel & unusual!  Heh!  Good one Antonin!   

Now, please be sure to end our cruel and unusual punishment and allow us to free ourselves from this monstrous impediment to our freedom and liberty and KILL OBAMACARE NOW!

[Pandora]

“The administration remains confident that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional; one of the reasons for that is that the original personal responsibility clause…was a conservative idea,” he said.

Thus pinning it right on Romney.

eta:  fixed the darned tags

[Predator Don]

“The administration remains confident that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional; one of the reasons for that is that the original personal responsibility clause…was a conservative idea,” he said.

Thus pinning it right on Romney.

 Confident it is constitutional because the idea is conservative...LOL  That's funny as hell. What a defense of your law.Whining, "Well, the conservatives said it is constitutional so it must be".

What's sad is we have no conservative leadership who can pick this idiotic thought apart.

eta: fixed my previous tag error - P.

[Libertas]

Will they let us know, or make us wait?

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20120330/D9TQLQDO0.html

I hope Kennedy doesn't get swayed like he did when he switched sides and struck down school prayer!

 

[Glock32]

The only example of bipartisanship with that monstrosity was the roll call of Nays.

[trapeze]

Interesting article at Politico (via HotAir) about the possible consequences of the SCOTUS overturning O'BongoCare...

The Supreme Court has yet to rule on President Barack Obama’s health care law, but court watchers already are handicapping the domino effect if it falls.

If the justices knock out key parts of the law or bring down the whole thing, the reverberations could be felt across the legal landscape for generations to come, radically reining in the scope of federal power, according to supporters of the law and others who closely track the high court.

And if the justices decide the individual mandate is a constitutional overreach, these observers say, federal labor and environmental laws could be the next on the firing line.

Yeah, in my dreams.

Interesting read. I have to look at this and similar articles as the liberal media trying to influence the court ("Oh, please don't strike down O'BongoCare! The world will just end! Please, believe us when we say this...we are only trying to prevent the end of the world as we know it!) any way they can...again, carrying the water for the Democrats.

Of course, it's absolute nonsense. But you should read the whole thing if for no other reason than to fully realize how scared the left is right now.

I truly hope that the SCOTUS strikes down the whole thing. I am not confident that they will but I hope they do. The leftists, OTOH, seem to have done a complete 180 in their thinking. As recently as last Monday they believed that O'BongoCare would be upheld my a lopsided majority and now they are totally convinced that it will go down in flames.

This article is emblematic of their true inner thinking now.

Again, I have no idea if O'BongoCare will live or die at the end of this session of the SCOTUS but I will enjoy the mental anguish of the left for the next couple of months.

[Glock32]

Funny how they talk about it "radically reining in the scope of federal power" without immediately having a corollary question pop up in their heads: How did Federal power radically expand in the first place?

Thomas Sowell coined a great term regarding liberals -- they engage in "first order thinking", seemingly unable (or unwilling) to consider the many contingencies that can arise as the result of doing this or that. The Law of Unintended Consequences writ large.

[trapeze]

Funny how they talk about it "radically reining in the scope of federal power" without immediately having a corollary question pop up in their heads: How did Federal power radically expand in the first place?

Funny how they are all but having a coronary over the oral arguments of last week.

[trapeze]

Michael Barone's thoughts on the matter:

“I don’t worry about the Constitution,” said Rep. Phil Hare, Democrat of Illinois, at a town hall meeting where voters questioned his support of the legislation that became Obamacare. You can find the clip on youtube.com, where it has 462,084 hits.

That was before the 2010 election, in which Hare, running for a third term in a district designed by Democrats to elect a Democrat, was defeated 53 to 43 percent by Bobby Schilling, proprietor of a pizza parlor in East Moline.

A lot of politicians are worrying about the Constitution these days. Liberal commentators were shocked this past week when in three days of oral argument in the lawsuits challenging Obamacare, five Supreme Court justices — a majority — asked questions strongly suggesting they think the legislation is unconstitutional.

And so the Constitution — and the limits it places on Congress’ powers — is once again part of our politics. And will continue to be, whichever way the Court rules.

[Pandora]

Gawddam'em.  One doesn't need a crystal ball, the throwing of the bones, or the I-Ching to know the gawdamm law is unConstitutional, thank you one and all y'all legal nitpicking Volohkhers.

[Pandora]

He's still at it.

Fox News’ Martha McCallum advised Thursday that the Obama Administration has been quietly sending missives to the Supreme Court threatening that if it doesn’t rule in his favor on ObamaCare, Medicare will face disruption and “chaos.”  Therefore, if SCOTUS rules in favor of the US Constitution, Obama & Co will begin its campaign to either destroy Medicare or make those on it suffer greatly.  The Obama syndicate is said to be threatening to hold off Medicare payments to doctors and hospitals if SCOTUS does not comply with Obama’s demands and submit to him.

Canada Free Press via Gateway Pundit

We can add blackmail to his list of crimes.  Or is extortion?

[EW1(SG)]

That one's extortion.

[Glock32]

And the bigger question: is anyone ever going to do anything about it?

[Libertas]

Call his bluff.

[Libertas]

We recently had the dire warning (whatever) from Ruth Badbreath Ginsburg about a sharply divided court...now evidence is emerging that the lawless Obama Regime is set to dictate the implementation of key elements of ObamaCare if SCOTUS nixes all or part of the unconstitutional law.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_CARE_OVERHAUL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-06-18-16-22-27

Shocking I know, such a surprise that the Great Destroyer and Usurper would plan to subjugate us all to his whimsical desires.

I think if this comes to pass it is Obama's way of asking all American's if they want to be slaves or fight back and spill blood to retain their liberty.  Any other interpretation would be dangerously foolish and terminally naive.

[charlesoakwood]

Oh Rhett Libertas, sometimes you can be so eloquent.