Comments on: On Obamacare, SCOTUS, and Liberal Desperation

By: funwithknives

funwithknives — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 15:22:31 +0000

which way SCOTUS could go and at the same time wonder about a “boogey man” we as conservatives need to add to our numbers.

In The Age Of Clinton, we had Reno,Patrick, Holder and Jamie Gorelck for starters. The IRS being used as a damper on constitutionalism. Any-one/ or group who questioned Bill and Hill were probed, prodded. and demonized.The resultant blow back gave us Edition 1.0 of the TEA Parties: Militias,Pro-Se citizens groups and similar.
When Bill got unelected the groups disappeared and virtually all formerly concerned citizens went to sleep, for many reasons.

But now, many more are in the mix. So many in fact, that none are unaffected. Membership in ‘regaining what we already have’ groups is climbing and people finally reallize that going to sleep is not a plan,and doing nothing is actually dangerous to your health.

No matter which way this decision goes, Constitutionalism is Stronger for it.
1) Found UnConstitutional : a solid win for us and a strength for the eventual condidateand a fulcrum for future use.
2) Found Constitutional: outrage of a sort occurs and more disaffected citizens than ever , look to the like-minded for numbers and support. In June! Right where numbers will be crucial.
I’ve never been called an optimist but if there IS a downside, how big can it be? Getting rid of pernicous laws always is a struggle {unlike passing them} so if I’m wrong, to what degree?

If I’m a viewed as a Naif , let the drumbeat commence…….

By: Dave_A

Dave_A — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 06:11:04 +0000

Because many leftie laws defer so heavily to administrative rule-making, you really don’t know what the law does UNTIL it’s passed & the various unelected desk-jockeys start implementing it….

By: Mike Ferguson

Mike Ferguson — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 05:48:49 +0000

(nt)

By: Scope

Scope — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 20:58:52 +0000

are going to be quite interesting. Even without cameras in the courtroom, reporters will be running out at every opportunity to let us know what is going on. I’m sure there will also be a transcript. I’m sticking with the cautious optimism of both Rivkin, who helped win the case for the 26 states, and Clement who will be arguing for our side at the SC.

As to Ms. Lithwick, at least she is Canadian. I’m sure you’ve heard San Fran Nan’s current comments, and she believes she is America’s head nanny.

By: daconia

daconia — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 20:08:33 +0000

Even a liberal justice has to give some credence to the Constitution, and have some understanding how important the issue is. I suspect at least one will uphold the sacred document. Even if not, all of the other justices will strike Obamacare down. The verdict will be 5-4 or better.

By: lineholder

lineholder — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 19:52:41 +0000

I sincerely hope you are correct.

On prediction #3…probably.

I don’t normally frequent liberal sites. There’s just too much of lie-telling and web-spinning in it for me to appreciate it. But in the past few days, they seem to be suffering from yet another “we-have-to-pass-it-to-know-what’s-in-it” moment of delusion. The amount of desperation seems much higher than normal, which I think is rather telling in and of itself.

By: Viet71

Viet71 — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 19:18:10 +0000

Prediction #2: At least one of the liberal Justices will join the majority, making it a 6-3 decision.

Prediction #3: Ms. Lithwick will continue to do quite well financially.