Quotes of the day

posted at 8:45 pm on April 1, 2012 by Allahpundit

“Although it would be folly to predict what the court will conclude, policy experts, insurers, doctors and legislators are now seriously contemplating the repercussions of a complete change in course two years after the nation began to put the law into place…

“The most ambitious provisions would be nearly impossible to salvage, like the requirement that insurers offer coverage even to those with existing medical conditions and the broad expansion of the Medicaid program for the poor. Popular pieces of the legislation might survive in the market, like insuring adult children up to age 26 through their parents’ policies, along with some of the broader changes being made in the health care system in how hospitals and doctors deliver care…

“‘The part I struggle with is how you undo two years worth of implementation,’ said Dr. Glen R. Stream, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians. ‘It would leave tremendous uncertainty about what is the direction we’re going in and that uncertainty would obviously affect the patients directly.’”

***

“‘A decision in the challengers’ favor … would lead to probably an array of attacks on different parts of the federal regulatory state because for the first time, you have five justices who are going to take very seriously limits on Congressional power,’ Tom Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog, said at a POLITICO Pro briefing just before last week’s oral arguments.

“‘And so, a lot of things that Congress does that maybe framers of the Constitution would have thought are beyond what the true regulation of interstate commerce is — but which the modern Supreme Court has blessed — would be back on the table,’ Goldstein added…

“‘Is the court going to become a dedicated foe of all manner of social legislation?’ Lazarus asked. ‘If anything amounts to micromanaging rational choices by Congress, it’s this. Everyone acknowledges that it’s well within Congress’s power to regulate the health care market. … For a court to find a way to overturn that, second-guess that choice, I can’t think of a more radical transformation. The court would be basically reneging on the judicial restraint commitment it made in 1937-38 during the Roosevelt era.’”

***

“[I]t seems to me that a succinct answer to Justice Scalia’s question is that the commerce clause would not limit Congress’s ability to regulate broccoli — if members of the House and Senate were crazy enough to pass legislation requiring all of us to eat green vegetables and if that were deemed a rational way to regulate commerce. The same could be said of health clubs…

“Congress has the constitutional power to pass many bills that would strike most people as idiotic, but as a popularly elected assembly, it doesn’t. The Supreme Court itself has said: ‘The principal and basic limit on the federal commerce power is that inherent in all Congressional action — the built-in restraints that our system provides through state participation in federal governmental action. The political process ensures that laws that unduly burden the states will not be promulgated.’ And absurd bills like a broccoli mandate are likely to fail other constitutional tests…

“It seems curious that opponents of the health care law are now looking to the commerce clause, as opposed to the Bill of Rights, as a bulwark of individual liberty.”

***

“If there is a legitimate challenge to the law, my hunch is that it is likely to come over the question of whether the individual mandate is as narrowly drawn as possible to achieve its objective. If regulating the interstate market for health care requires regulating health insurance, and if assuring a healthy insurance market requires solving the problem of free-riders who drive up premiums and taxes for everyone else, then isn’t the solution to require everyone to buy ‘catastrophic’ insurance?

“Roberts asked that question twice, but got no satisfactory answer, either from the solicitor general or any of the other justices. The reason is that there is no good answer. The safer ground for health reform was always to base it, at least initially, on policies that cover major medical events such as a heart attack, a premature birth, or treatment of cancer or a serious chronic condition. Yet such an approach has always been rejected out of hand by liberal Democrats and powerful ‘disease lobbies’ who were intent on finally achieving health-care coverage that was both universal and comprehensive. Now their over-reaching has not only driven up the cost of health reform and made it difficult to win broad political support, but has also put the entire law in constitutional jeopardy.

“In the end, Roberts will see the institutional peril in overturning the most significant piece of domestic legislation in a generation, particularly in the wake of the overtly partisan decisions of Bush v. Gore and the Citizens United. With Kennedy in tow, the chief is likely to articulate a modest new limit on Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce that would allow health reform to proceed in some fashion.”

***

“[I]n this case, nobody has said they want to stop government from providing universal access to health care. On the contrary, the plaintiffs have stated that a program like Medicare, in which the government provides citizens with insurance directly, would be clearly constitutional. They’ve also stated that a scheme of compulsory private insurance would be constitutional if somehow the government could make people buy it when they show up at the hospital — suggesting, as Elena Kagan stated, that the only problem with the Affordable Care Act is temporal.

“Most amazing of all: The plaintiffs have conceded that a universal health insurance program would be constitutional if, instead of penalizing people who decline to get insurance, the government enacted a tax and refunded the money to people who had insurance. As Sonia Sotomayor noted, functionally such a scheme would be exactly the same as the Affordable Care Act. Both the plaintiffs and some of the skeptical justices have also indicated that the Affordable Care Act would be constitutional if the law’s architects had simply used the word ‘tax’ to describe the penalty.

“Think about that for a second: If the justices strike down the Affordable Care Act, they would be stopping the federal government from pursuing a perfectly constitutional goal via a perfectly constitutional scheme just because Congress and the President didn’t use perfectly constitutional language to describe it.”

***

“[B]y requiring the private purchase of insurance, the mandate kept the true cost of the health care expansion off the government’s books, and largely out of the Congressional debate. As the Cato Institute’s Michael Cannon has noted, during the Clinton era the Congressional Budget Office scored an individual mandate as a form of government spending, which pushed the official cost of the Clinton bill into the trillions. But the Obama White House was savvier in its mandate design, and the C.B.O. was more compliant in its scoring. As a result, a bill that might require over $2 trillion in new health care spending — private as well as public — over its first decade was sold with a $900 billion price tag.

“So the mandate was politically brilliant, in a sense. But its brilliance was evanescent. Founding a new entitlement on an insider-friendly sleight-of-hand made the bill much easier to pass. But it’s made it harder to defend thereafter, both in the court of law and the court of public opinion…

“The reality is that the more treatments advanced medicine can offer us (and charge us for), the harder it becomes to guarantee the kind of truly universal, truly comprehensive coverage that liberals have sought for years. The individual mandate conceals these realities, but it doesn’t do away with them. If it’s repealed or swept aside, both left and right might be able to focus on a more plausible goal: not a perfectly universal system, but more modest reforms that would help the hardest-pressed among the uninsured.”

***

“A 2,700-page law is not a ‘law’ by any civilized understanding of the term. Law rests on the principle of equality before it. When a bill is 2,700 pages, there’s no equality: Instead, there’s a hierarchy of privilege micro-regulated by an unelected, unaccountable, unconstrained, unknown, and unnumbered bureaucracy. It’s not just that the legislators who legislate it don’t know what’s in it, nor that the citizens on the receiving end can never hope to understand it, but that even the nation’s most eminent judges acknowledge that it is beyond individual human comprehension. A 2,700-page law is, by definition, an affront to self-government.”

***

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

***


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

…it wasn’t wet was it? (:>)

KOOLAID2 on April 1, 2012 at 11:38 PM

It was loud and smelled like roses, but everyone likes their own flavor.

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:42 PM

a capella on April 1, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Perfect! That and 12 Days were actually the first two songs I heard by them a couple of years ago.

4Grace on April 1, 2012 at 11:42 PM

I too am in a wonderful mood. Beautiful day. Nice fire going on the porch with the Miss’s. Lovely Shiraz . No complaints life is good. Well one minor complaint, I am having trouble trying to figure out how to post tunes on this iPad thingy. ; )

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:38 PM

No serious complaints either. Nice central CA day, good dinner and “big house 2011 zinfandel” Oops, too much fun, sorry. I wonder if minnesoter likes her lemon/vinegar cocktails?

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Good night Resist We Much .

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:43 PM

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 1, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Oh please, “presidential scholars” code for flaming liberals.

Cindy Munford on April 1, 2012 at 11:35 PM

…OandCongresswasholdinghimbytheba11s

KOOLAID2 on April 1, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Check out How presidential scholars rank your boy bushie..

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 1, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Check out how the rank Woodrow Wilson, America’s First Fascist President, and the President with the worst record on civil liberties. He’s usually in the top 5.

Wilson: America’s First Fascist President

Unlike the fake Upton Sinclair quote, “”When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross,” which he never said, is not in his novel “It Can’t Happen Here,” Irving Louis Horowitz, a radical Leftist sociology pioneer, did, in fact say, “Fascism will return to the United States not as right wing ideology but almost as a quasi-leftist ideology.”

The Left’s Lie About Fascism Will Outlive Cockroaches In A Nuclear Winter

Progressives Loved Fascism

Resist We Much on April 1, 2012 at 11:44 PM

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:42 PM

I’m pretty sure he has never known anything else. ; )

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:45 PM

After finally watching that vid with Van Jones, is there any doubt that Obama surrounds himself with idiots?

MeatHeadinCA on April 1, 2012 at 11:45 PM

BlaxPac on April 1, 2012 at 11:35 PM

uhhhhhhhhm, SORRY!!!!

Obama created and saved more jobs than anyone is history! Mainly cause he’s the only president ever to enjoy that designation, but hogwash! – 3,000,000 jobs equals greatest president in the last 500 years.

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

stop it already! :-)

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:40 PM

My thoughts exactly—tell me more you naughty girl.

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

The RINO chatter about ObamaCare is just thoroughly obnoxious much as the democrat chatter is sickening.

The law is absolutely unconstitutional not only because of the Mandate but because of everything else that is in it. Our Federal government has swept so far beyond the enumerated powers it was granted by the Constitution that its authority is both a joke and an embarrassment to anyone who is thoroughly knowledgable about our Founding. The entire idea of “judicial review” that inevitably leads to “judicial supremacy” stated as dictum in “Marbury vs Madison” is pure bunk. The SCUS has no right to be acting like the ultimate arbiter and the Congress has no right to pass bills like ObamaCare as an agent of the States and expect anything else but “Nullification” by the states of the entire 2700 page mess!

As Constitutional scholar Edwin Vieira (PhD, JD – both Harvard) notes in his two volume work “Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution”:

1. “Marshall argued that the judges taking an oath to support the Constitution directly implied that in supporting it they had a right to interpret its true meaning. But the argument that judges taking an oath to support the Constitution does not prove thereby they exercise an exclusive power to “review” over the Constitution’s meaning – that is unchallegeable authority to nullify the powers of Congress and the President, as they too take oaths to support the Constitution.”

2. “Marshall in “Marbury vs Madison” should have realized that it was emphatically the province of We The People “to say what the constitutional law is” and We The People’s representatives to say what the statutory law is, in the first instance. For the judiciary to say what the law is arises only in the course of deciding a particular case. Nothing in Marshall’s reasoning in the case supports the further notion that, the court having spoken in a particular case, its decision binds one or both of the other coordinate branches of government in all things thereafter, as well as the litigants in the particular case.”

3. “A decision by the SCOTUS on a constitutional issue can never be law, because the test of its validity is its conformity to the very law it supposedly construes. Thus, the notion that opinions of the Supreme Court on constitutional issues are themselves self-sufficiently the supreme law of the land is simply circular and nonsensical. Courts are mere instruments of law and can will nothing. The courts decisions are binding only upon the original litigants and no one else.”

4. “The real Federal government consists of 5 parts, the Congress, President, Judiciary, the States, and We The People. Each of these Branches of government has the right, power, and duty, to support and defend the Constitution because Congress/Pres/judges/state officials because of the oath of affirmation from them to that effect, and We The People because the people were responsible for the “ordain[ing] and establish[ing]” the Constitution in the first place, and ultimately control its substance through the process of amendment. Congress does exercise political supremacy because it can impeach judges and the President. But if must have its actions ratified or rejected by the electorate. Thus, ultimate supremacy lies with We The People. And supremacy must lie there: For if the principals cannot decide the meaning of their own supreme law, it is absurd to believe their mere agents can.”

5. “Blackstone’s Commentaries was the standard legal treatise for Americans when the Constitution was written. The Court is not supreme – because as Blackstone pointed out “whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself: there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.” ”

We The People and the States have the right to “Nullify” the entire mess of Obamacare no matter what the SCUS determines!

Falcon46 on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Another month has passed and I would like to thank Ed and Allah for their efforts in keeping us informed.

They are real pros. I bet some day Ed will host the rush limbaugh show or get a cabinet position. Allah too.

SparkPlug on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

no home run for you!

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

How’s my baby doing, really? Well, I hope.

Resist We Much on April 1, 2012 at 11:13 PM

she’s on IV’s cause she won’t eat or drink, but the doc says she’ll be fine in a couple days. The Vet bill’s gonna wipe me out.

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:26 PM

I was talking about you, goofy!

Resist We Much on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

landlines on April 1, 2012 at 11:11 PM

+1

And personally, I don’t care what the left thinks of the Bush/Gore case, I disliked Bush even then but it was obvious Gore was manipulating the recount to try to gain an unfair/undemocratic advantage, hoping to use the courts to reverse the election. Otherwise he would have recounted the entire state and wouldn’t have legally resisted when Bush tried to demand a full recount.

If they have a problem with that, or with any of the rest of our freedoms and liberties: bring it on!

FloatingRock on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Sharpton on April 1, 2012 at 11:44 PM

I knew it! Sharpton never sleeps :) What are you wearing to bed?

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:47 PM

I’ll say this and then it’s off to bed. Ya’ll keep me up way too late last night-again.

It seems to me that all the hype on “judicial activism” is due to the proggie’s fear of their sacred cows being sacrificed.

These Justices are the most conservative in years and willing to right the ship, so to speak, from the abuses of past (liberal) courts.

That scares the shyte out of the left as they constantly try to re-adjust the load to achieve their lopsided goals.

What the court is/should be doing is making those decisions to bring the correct ballast to what now can be seen as Unconstitutional Law from earlier rulings.

You want a living, breathing document? Fine. Let’s first correct all the overreaches of past courts that has led to bad law and bring them in line with the 21st century.

If the court passes on O’care it’s saying that We The People no longer have any rights.

Let the nut cuttin begin.

OkieDoc on April 1, 2012 at 11:48 PM

I was talking about you, goofy!

Resist We Much on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

I know, I was answering angrymike, cause my best friend is actually my dog that got tagged by the snake :)

just quoted the wrong comment

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Night, just be careful of them zipper snakes.

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Will do. My Mum trained me with special powers to deal with them. Niters.

Resist We Much on April 1, 2012 at 11:49 PM

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 1, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Hey “boy”, to use your own phrase, Why ain’t you answered up? We’re still her for a couple more hours. You don’t have to work tomorrow and just got your EBT reloaded.

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:49 PM

We The People and the States have the right to “Nullify” the entire mess of Obamacare no matter what the SCUS determines!

Falcon46 on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Yep, one way or another.

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:49 PM

I knew it! Sharpton never sleeps :) What are you wearing to bed?

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:47 PM

The golf dress or sun dress, either one is fine.

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:51 PM

After finally watching that vid with Van Jones, is there any doubt that Obama surrounds himself with idiots?

MeatHeadinCA on April 1, 2012 at 11:45 PM

There is no doubt..:)

Dire Straits on April 1, 2012 at 11:51 PM

They are real pros. I bet some day Ed will host the rush limbaugh show or get a cabinet position. Allah too.

SparkPlug on April 1, 2012 at 11:46 PM

LOL! Suck up./

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:51 PM

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Sorry it happened but I sure am glad your pup is going to be okay. Vet bills, unfortunately I can relate.

Cindy Munford on April 1, 2012 at 11:52 PM

DHChron
well your dang lucky she’s alive, you need to get a bunch of black snakes to control the rattlesnakes.
well all I’m beat, and my next wife is on the today show tomorrow, so I’m hitting the hay
Night everyone don’t forget to clean up and shut off the lights.

angrymike on April 1, 2012 at 11:52 PM

That reminds me…when were the first lawsuits filed on ObamaCare? This was passed 03/2010 and legal challenges began quickly.

So those who are crying about having to backtrack on what they’ve done knew they might have to do so. I suspect crocodile tears on that one.

INC on April 1, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Especially since the federal judge in Florida declared the entire law unconstitutional. He did not issue an injunction because he said that the fact of declaring the law unconstitutional was a de facto injunction for the administration to stop implementation. Therefore, at that point, the administration should have stopped implementation until higher courts ruled otherwise. The administration chose to completely ignore the Federal court in Florida ruling and went on as if nothing had changed. [Note to resident derangement troll -- that's another worst than Nixon action on the part of your god Obama].

Truth to tell, that would have been an excellent reason for the House to strip funds from Obamacare in the budget since its legal status had been struck down by a federal court.

AZfederalist on April 1, 2012 at 11:53 PM

I knew it! Sharpton never sleeps :) What are you wearing to bed?

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:47 PM

A cherry-red Veeelore warm-up suit with all gold chain, black socks, my Air Jordan Retro 11 Space Jam trainers, and a hair-net to protect my pompadour.

No, seriously, just Boucheron.

Bmore: Niters, too!

Resist We Much on April 1, 2012 at 11:54 PM

How do you end up putting Trayvon’s name in this?

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 1, 2012 at 10:56 PM

….Olookthereisafrickensquirrel!

KOOLAID2 on April 1, 2012 at 11:54 PM

well all I’m beat, and my next wife is on the today show tomorrow, so I’m hitting the hay
Night everyone don’t forget to clean up and shut off the lights.

angrymike on April 1, 2012 at 11:52 PM

I thought it wasn’t until Tuesday that she would co-host?

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:54 PM

It’s too bad Obama and the Democrats chickened out on levying a new set of taxes to pay for what the individual mandate is covering – because then it would have been constitutional legislation. Obama’s campaign promise to not implement new taxes on those below $200K apparently meant more than trying to pass health reform constitutionally. Also: everyone knows they never would have managed to pass it in the first place had it taken the form of new taxes.

The Democrats tried to get around new taxes and ended up in a dead end with the individual mandate. It’s what happens when you play politics instead of trying to actually solve a problem honestly and directly.

Seixon on April 1, 2012 at 11:55 PM

There is no doubt..:)

Dire Straits on April 1, 2012 at 11:51 PM

Dire, I’m having difficulty figuring out how to load tunes on this iPad. I have one in mind. You go first. Oh and one other thing about this iPad, it isn’t always capable of playing the YouTube vids.

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:55 PM

latah angry to the mike man

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Shump on April 1, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Thank you so much Shump!! I copied into Word, took out the goofy large font and margins so now it’s a little over 1500 pages so I can print it out (gulp) little by little.

I appreciate your effort!!!

LazyHips on April 1, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Good Night angry mike. Sleep well.

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Arnoldziffel
maybe your right, oh well, I’m still tired, I shut this place down last night and opened this morning.

angrymike on April 1, 2012 at 11:57 PM

Cindy Munford on April 1, 2012 at 11:52 PM

Hi Cindy. Glad you are back. We were worried Mr. Munford put you on probation because you were spending too much time at the shop talking politics and muscle cars.

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:58 PM

The court needs to reverse their Kelo verses City of New London decision.

On a separate but related note, the only candidates I trust to appoint judges to the SCOTUS is Ron Paul.

FloatingRock on April 2, 2012 at 12:00 AM

This Roberts-will-cave theory is nuts. Obamacare is a 2,700 page “law” that not one single congressman has read, let alone digested; it was crammed through a Democrat congress without one single Republican in favor; dozens upon dozens of polls, from all quarters, indicate that a large majority of American voters do not want Obamacare, have NEVER supported the Obama takeover of the world’s finest heathcare system, and want to see the legislation overturned and withdrawn. Roberts is a smart man and surely understands this. This decision rests on Justice Kennedy’s shoulders, and he too understands these facts. So we shall see. I have no clue on how he will vote. Maybe he’ll just flip a quarter.

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 12:00 AM

angrymike on April 1, 2012 at 11:57 PM

You did a great job by the way. If I’m last out I ‘ll cover it. ; )

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:02 AM

four out of five Dr Peppers recommend stealth eugenics in low income neighborhoods.

thanks Dr Pepper

(no, I’ll never get tired of that joke)

DHChron on April 2, 2012 at 12:03 AM

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:58 PM

Try this one on..:)

PS..My father loved to hear his music..:)

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:03 AM

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:58 PM

No, my daughter is visiting from Virginia.

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 12:04 AM

Sure, maybe the Romney mandate is Constitutional if done at the state level but it’s still wrong for precisely the same reasons, just applied to a smaller portion of the country.

FloatingRock on April 1, 2012 at 11:36 PM

But the big difference is right there: The State decided that’s what they wanted-the people of the Commonwealth followed the guidelines and got it passed. Even if Ronmey disliked it, he’d have little choice but to sign it…

Replace “MassHealth” with any other hot button issue and it’ll still be the same.

ObamaCare, OTOH is President Obamas baby. He voiced it, he went to bat, used the bully pulpit, etc and got it to where it is now, good or bad.

Beating Romney up on that isn’t a even a issue…you can disagree with him on other stuff, but for that, it ain’t enough to cede the White House to the Dems for another 4 years.

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:55 PM

Good luck in your fight with the i-pad..:)

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:05 AM

On a separate but related note, the only candidates I trust to appoint judges to the SCOTUS is Ron Paul.

FloatingRock on April 2, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Well he better hurry up a win a primary/caucus *somewhere* because he is fast running out of states. Face it, he’s a third-tier candidate. He won’t be doing any appointing.

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Palin thread winding down?

Bmore on April 1, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Posting in both threads and on my car club group…and reading Brietbart headlines…typical night for me…:o)

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:03 AM

That tune loads fine on the iPad. : )

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:09 AM

well all I’m beat, and my next wife is on the today show tomorrow, so I’m hitting the hay
Night everyone don’t forget to clean up and shut off the lights.

angrymike on April 1, 2012 at 11:52 PM

I thought it wasn’t until Tuesday that she would co-host?

arnold ziffel on April 1, 2012 at 11:54 PM

…My next wife IS hosting the Today show on Tuesday…angrymike must be marrying that mad cow woman or something! (:>)

KOOLAID2 on April 2, 2012 at 12:09 AM

What we need is a huge flushing of the American toilet that has become government so we can take our lumps and return to running this country by the constitution instead of a pack of idiots trying to steer us into the soviet union, china, venezuela, western europe, etc. Socialism and/or communism has worked out so well for those places only a complete idiot bereft of any common sense would set out for those goals.

Yet here we are with those exact idiots insisting we press on full steam ahead. There really OUGHT to be a law. Treason ought to cover what’s being done to us now.

Truly we have at minimum 40% of the American public that are no more than a waste of resources…liberal and republican progressives, their very existence is causing global warming! You know what that means…..

<<>>

Wolfmoon on April 2, 2012 at 12:11 AM

I often wonder why the potheads (I use that term affectionately, I’ve been known to partake) support Obama so fervently. The prez has been more anti-pot than Bush.

DHChron on April 2, 2012 at 12:11 AM

The founding of the greatest country EVER was written on about 4 pages.

SouthernGent on April 1, 2012 at 8:53 PM

One page – if you don’t mind! :)

OldEnglish on April 2, 2012 at 12:14 AM

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 12:05 AM

I agree and thank goodness..:)

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:15 AM

carbon_footprint on April 2, 2012 at 12:13 AM

Nooorrrrmmmm!..:)

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:15 AM

If I ever needed a Diplomat for a cabinet position, I know who I’d pick. : )

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:19 AM

…My next wife IS hosting the Today show on Tuesday…angrymike must be marrying that mad cow woman or something! (:>)

KOOLAID2 on April 2, 2012 at 12:09 AM

You know, I’m a grounded individual and not star struck but Sarah could have really had a profound effect—in a good way in turning this country around if she had run. Obviously she had her reasons and I still love her. She is one of us. Current leadership both parties can kiss myeat —- and die.

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:20 AM

PPP’s polls of Maryland and Wisconsin are out. Romney wins both, Maryland by an absolute blowout (52%-27%) but Wisconsin is closer at 43%-37%.

Want to know why? Because WI is an open primary. And if you check the crosstabs, Santorum’s getting a massive boost in numbers from self-described “very liberal” and “somewhat liberal” voters: according to the crosstabs on pg. 16 of the pdf, Santorum is winning the Democratic vote over Romney by 39%-11%. Operation Chaos Redux.

Remember how a lot of True Conservatives were whining that open primaries were the reason Romney would win the nomination? Seems like it’s exactly the opposite: liberals and ‘independents’ (read: liberals w/o a party affiliation) are voting for Santorum in droves because they know he’s the weaker candidate. Meanwhile Romney is winning Republicans over Santorum by a massive 50%-36% margin in Wisconsin.

If that isn’t the final nail in Rick’s coffin I don’t know what is.

Esoteric on April 2, 2012 at 12:20 AM

Nooorrrrmmmm!..:)

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Norm! Excellent post.

carbon_footprint on April 2, 2012 at 12:20 AM

‘It would leave tremendous uncertainty about what is the direction we’re going in and that uncertainty would obviously affect the patients directly.’”

…as opposed to the high degree of certainty we enjoy now, with random, politically-motivated decrees coming from HHS Sec. Sebelius at irregular intervals?

RightKlik on April 2, 2012 at 12:21 AM

iPad definitely no likely that one. Strange little device this thing.

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:21 AM

To Obama, V. Jones, and their friends…

4Grace on April 2, 2012 at 12:01 AM

Here’s what I want to say to Jugears and all of his minions come November

AZfederalist on April 2, 2012 at 12:21 AM

If I ever needed a Diplomat for a cabinet position, I know who I’d pick. : )

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:19 AM

One person you wouldn’t want is me. Now if you want a right wing, nasty pit bull I’m your man.

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:21 AM

blink on April 2, 2012 at 12:20 AM

Hi, dearest, how are you? Catch any “fish” lately?

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 12:22 AM

Bmore, I finally answered your question from this morning on that old QOTD thread.

INC on April 2, 2012 at 12:23 AM

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:21 AM

No, I’d have you at either Homeland Security or Defence.

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:24 AM

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 12:05 AM

You are trying to create a distinction without a difference. The mandate is wrong at the state level for the same reasons it’s wrong at the national level. The Obamacare mandate isn’t wrong simply because it’s unconstitutional, it’s wrong because it’s an intrusion of our freedom and liberty, and because it’s unpopular a lot of people spent a lot of time figuring out legal arguments to protect our rights. If everybody thought the mandate was a great idea, consistent with freedom and liberty, nobody would be challenging it, but they did challenge it because it’s an unconstitutional, un-American intrusion on our liberty. It’s also an intrusion on our liberty if a state or city does it and is wrong in that case as well. That the US Constitution might not protect the residents of a state from such corruption doesn’t make it right. It doesn’t change the mandate from a negative into a positive, it’s a negative in either case, regardless of whether or not there is a majority of people in the state that are stupid enough to fall for this sort of crony corporatist racket.

And if we are lucky enough that the SCOTUS overturns Obamacare, if Republicans are dumb enough to stand by Romneycare, they deserve to lose. I just hope that enough of us see what is happening and make sure that a good 3rd party wins instead of Obama.

FloatingRock on April 2, 2012 at 12:25 AM

Bmore, I finally answered your question from this morning on that old QOTD thread.

INC on April 2, 2012 at 12:23 AM

I saw that, matter of fact I responded. I think.

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:26 AM

music time:

men with banjos who know how to use them

DHChron on April 2, 2012 at 12:27 AM

“It seems curious that opponents of the health care law are now looking to the commerce clause, as opposed to the Bill of Rights, as a bulwark of individual liberty.”

Nobody’s looking at the commerce clause as a “bulwark of individual liberty.” We’re focused on the commerce clause because left-wing statists are using it as a bulldozer for the rest of the constitution, including the Bill of Rights.

RightKlik on April 2, 2012 at 12:27 AM

Avenged Sevenfold – “Nightmare”

carbon_footprint on April 2, 2012 at 12:23 AM

That one played perfect. It said it was custom just for the iPad thingy. Thanks.

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:29 AM

AZfederalist on April 2, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Amen to that. Don’t you EVAH come back!

4Grace on April 2, 2012 at 12:29 AM

It was about hearing music in mono.

INC on April 2, 2012 at 12:29 AM

PS..My father loved to hear his music..:)

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:03 AM

I have his CD. Sounds like our dads were a lot alike. Have I told you before about times he and his cop friends were listening to Marty Robbins “Gunfighter Ballads”, Lime lighters, Kingston trio etc? This was in the early sixties. A couple of times he and his friends would have too much Coors to drink and as they were leaving fire off their revolvers. This was in a decent, normal middle class CA neighborhood. Apparently the neighbors didn’t feel it would do any good to call the cops—since ten of them were already present. No wonder I’m warped.

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:31 AM

It was about hearing music in mono.

INC on April 2, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Yes, no good?

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:32 AM

I can’t think of a more radical transformation.

Obamacare is either constitutional or it’s not.

If it’s not constitutional, there’s noting “radical” about striking it down.

What’s radical is passing 2,700 pages of legislation that has a wild array of provisions all connected to an unconstitutional individual mandate à la Rube Goldberg.

RightKlik on April 2, 2012 at 12:34 AM

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:31 AM

I hear you..Gotta love those memories!!..:)

PS..My father was a huge Marty Robbins fan..:)

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:35 AM

Beating Romney up on that isn’t a even a issue…you can disagree with him on other stuff,

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Oh, believe me, I am entirely justified beating up Romney for Romneycare too. It disqualifies him from office, just as Obamacare disqualifies Obama.

FloatingRock on April 2, 2012 at 12:35 AM

DHChron on April 2, 2012 at 12:03 AM
Nor will I (:

Rusty Allen on April 2, 2012 at 12:37 AM

A little Pink Floyd for our Dear Leader.

And another for his fellow travelers.

4Grace on April 2, 2012 at 12:37 AM

If you lose part of the song in mono, I think it’s worse because you need to hear all the sound of the song. The short version is that I don’t believe it’s the number of speakers outside your head, it’s having two ears that are simultaneously sending sound waves to your brain that makes the difference in hearing music.

INC on April 2, 2012 at 12:37 AM

“It seems curious that opponents of the health care law are now looking to the commerce clause, as opposed to the Bill of Rights, as a bulwark of individual liberty.”

Uh, IIRC we did that for almost an entire year prior to the vote and we were mocked, laughed at, or ignored.

It’s been a long day so I’m off to bed now. But before I go I’d like to ask 0bamaderangementsyndrom 5 questions.

1.) Why did the Communist Party USA send Obama a congratulatory letter when he won the presidency? Source

2.) Why did Obama say he ‘shares values’ with a man who recently accepted an award from a Marxist organization? Source

3.) Why is there a picture of Obama with the man who said he was going to have to “kill” me and my babies to gain “freedom”? Source 1 Source 2

4.) Why is there a picture of Obama with the group who last week said they didn’t have to abide by U.S. laws? Source

5.) Why is there a picture of Obama with the group who put a bounty on the head of an American citizen? Source

I’ll check back in the morning to read your strawman arguments and deflections.

Flora Duh on April 2, 2012 at 12:37 AM

blink on April 2, 2012 at 12:30 AM

You sure got a couple of fighters on the Cameron thread. Very funny but I worried.

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 12:38 AM

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 12:00 AM

It is very unfortunate that the backhanded way in which this legislation was passed is not an issue before the court. Your point was good and Kennedy’s take is a crap shoot.

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:38 AM

What’s radical is passing 2,700 pages of legislation that has a wild array of provisions all connected to an unconstitutional individual mandate à la Rube Goldberg.

RightKlik on April 2, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Yeah except his sister Ruth Ginsberg is jiggy with it.

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:41 AM

INC, I’m back on the laptop and went to look for your reply. Why am I not finding it? Was it last nights or the previous nights?

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:41 AM

here’s a funny for the day

SNL digital short (but hilarious I swear)

DHChron on April 2, 2012 at 12:41 AM

Did y’all see The Won has another sketchy donor?

http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/major-obama-campaign-donor-accused-of-fraud/

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 12:41 AM

No, my daughter is visiting from Virginia.

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 12:04 AM

Very good. I hope you are all having a good time. We really like it when you are here.

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:43 AM

Oh, believe me, I am entirely justified beating up Romney for Romneycare too. It disqualifies him from office, just as Obamacare disqualifies Obama.

FloatingRock on April 2, 2012 at 12:35 AM

Again, State *choice* vs *Federally Mandated*.

You’re condemning him for what he might do and ignoring what was already done.

And if Obama gets another 4 years, and is able to put in judges to SCOTUS, what happens when its finally rammed through…you won’t be able to blame Romney then.

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 12:44 AM

4Grace on April 2, 2012 at 12:37 AM

Pink Floyd..Try this one out!!..:)

Dire Straits on April 2, 2012 at 12:45 AM

she’s on IV’s cause she won’t eat or drink, but the doc says she’ll be fine in a couple days. The Vet bill’s gonna wipe me out.

DHChron on April 1, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Sankebite?.. dog?.. I beg forgivesness if I’ve misread this, or misunderstood..

My prayers to a quick recovery..

My best friend, is two, a beagle Jack Russel mix… manic, excitable as Hell, loves.. adores kids.. my childrens best playmate, a rescue, my wife saved him from some abusive neighborhood kids.. I was still having a hard winter,.. felt like Hell itself.. and she tapped me on the shoulder and said here Honey, an early Father’s Day gift.. She sat his lil three month old butt on my chest, and I’m staring eye to eye with the cutest living thing on Earth, a homeless puppy.

He wasn’t homeless after that moment..

I let my wife and kids name him,.. sigh,.. but I could live with Duke.. not how they meant it, but John Wayne was a surrogate father to me. So Duke works..

The family that he came from,.. well he had the worst case of worms I’d ever seen in a dog.. and when we had him treated, he was thrown into toxiemia,.. couldn’t even hold water down. We were so poor that year, couldn’t afford a vet, and none would work with us.. the best I could get was advice. tiny sips of water, crumbs of food, plain chicken,.. but mostly water, as he kept throwing it back up.

The kids were terrified, my wife,.. and everyone else around us pulled back, convinced he wasn’t going to make it. I was terrified too, but I wouldn’t give up, and for three days spent every waking moment tending him, loving him, slipping him water,.. what crumbs he could take.. after the third day, he started holding down his water better.. that night, he attacked his food like a starving puppy dog..

Duke has been my best friend since, my constant companion, he cries when I have to go out with out him,.. so we got him a hugging vest, which helps his anxiety,.. but he does love his daddy..

You do grow to love them so much, every bit family..

mark81150 on April 2, 2012 at 12:45 AM

difference in hearing music.

INC on April 2, 2012 at 12:37 AM

Yes, that makes all the sense in the world to me. I wasn’t sure of the exact nature of the issue pertaining to hearing. They say a similar thing about depth perception with vision. No depth perception when only having sight in one eye. But you can it is in fact audible, just not enjoyable. Correct?

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 12:45 AM

Did y’all see The Won has another sketchy donor?

http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/major-obama-campaign-donor-accused-of-fraud/

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 12:41 AM

Looks like lib4life’s pic on twitter. OK, kinda. Is this a Nigerian money scheme or just the straight Kenya rick roll?

arnold ziffel on April 2, 2012 at 12:46 AM

Cindy Munford on April 2, 2012 at 12:41 AM

Yes, I saw it. Quite a shocker, eh?

4Grace on April 2, 2012 at 12:47 AM

It’s nuts to think that if the SCOTUS frees us from Obamacare that we’re going to turn around and put the shackles back on by voting for Romney. The Republican Party is insane: they keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, but now more than ever before we are onto their game, thanks to the Internet.

FloatingRock on April 2, 2012 at 12:48 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6