1 **"This time, I promise I won't completely ignore you and shut you out of the discussion"?** Has any candidate made any noise criticizing the wan on how this stutterying clusterfuck of a law got passed in the first place? About a dozen broken promises and examples of sloppy leadership can and should be pointed out.

2 Only a dozen? Bah! That would be on a good day.

3 They even want to shut down mobile strip clubs outside football games!  Anti-capitalist bastards!

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/44703941/

4 Either way the Supreme Court rules, it's bad for Obama. If it strikes ObamaCare down, it's a big problem, because then he has to run for re-election promising his base that he'll pass some kind of health care measure in his second term.

Ok, and if they uphold it?

5 ABC News is reporting that the DOJ has also filed with the Supremes.  No mention of the NFIB brief.

6

Obama would risk derisive jeers even saying anything like this.

I somehow doubt that would stop him. Inside his mind, he's still loved and adored and has never made a mistake.

He thought he made one once, but he was wrong.

7 It would be sad for our nation if this became an election issue next year.

8 I await Scalia's (hopefully majority) opinion starting off:  "What SCoaMF would sign this unconstitutional garbage into law?"

9 @8, therefore we should cancel elections until all such issues go away.

10

ace:  Either way the Supreme Court rules, it's bad for Obama. If it strikes ObamaCare down, it's a big problem, because then he has to run for re-election promising his base that he'll pass some kind of health care measure in his second term.

********

Excuse me, but I, like other commenters upstream don't get this.  I understand it is bad for Obama if the court strikes down Obama care.

But if it upholds it?  How is that bad for him?  You mean it energizes our base?

11 In the last year of Obama's one term, he was jeered only once. But, that was widspread and continuous.

12

I still think, just for sport, we could elect a veto-proof, Tea Party congress, reelect the stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure, and then make him watch as all his landmark legislation gets repealed while the SCOTUS watches him like a hawk.

The prospect of a lame duck term for him is truly fapworthy.

13 @10, Actually the Feds should deem the elections to have occurred and keep everyone in place until all issues have been resolved.

14 A Wise Latina once said, everyone should have government-provided health care, even if they are forced to pay for it themselves at gunpoint.

15 I think the reasoning is if the clause is held to be severable, but the individual mandate is unconstitutional, then the whole bill implodes into a funding nightmare; as we still have to pay for the bill, but there is no funding mechanism for it.

Of course, if the mandate is not severable, then the whole bill is scrapped.

16 "Ok, and if they uphold it?"

Then it makes it crystal clear that the only way to get rid of it is to get rid of him, thus potentially energizing the voters to take him out.

It's possible.

17 Obama 2012 : Don't Make Me Murder You.

18 @14, actually, I think they should fire every federal employee and start from scratch.

19 >>>Ok, and if they uphold it? also bad because people want it overturned. The only not-so-bad thing is if the court upholds the decision (indv. mandate out, but law stands). But that's still not good for him. Now he's got to impose even higher taxes.

20 Ok, and if they uphold it?

Well, they're going to uphold Obamacare in principle, in the same way Heller upholds all but the most facially preposterous gun control laws.

So if Romney's the nominee, the SC decision might add to the depression of the not-Democrat vote, but I think "Romney" depresses it past losing anyway.

No downside!

21 Everyone has a right to a government-paid sex change operation like mine.

22 Everyone on the right needs to keep yammering about Kagan, her role as SG  while OgabeCare was being cooked up and the email trail showing her office was involved in discussions about it.

WaPo threw her a wet kiss a few days ago...and the left has been pre-emptively going after the black guy on the SCOTUS

23 So is "The Wise Latina" going to recuse herself?

Yeah I know......

24 I don't see how this will be a problem either way.

25 >>But that's still not good for him. Now he's got to impose even higher taxes.


Whoop Whoop!!

26 Not to mention all the unhinged lefties who will claim it failed because there was no public option. He isn't socialist enough!

27 scoamf is the new black

28

A Wise Latina once said, everyone should have government-provided health care, even if they are forced to pay for it themselves at gunpoint.

And a softball-playing Jewess added, "Recuse myself? Why would I recuse myself?"

29

But the NFIB is appealing the portion of the panelÂ’s decision that held that the unconstitutional individual mandate could be severed from the Obamacare legislation.

Earlier today, I commented that one of the Carolina's AG's (can't remember which one) had discovered the lack of a severability clause in OCare thanks to their rush to get it passed. That the 11th would act like it's still there is cause for much concern.

The way I understand it, that clause absolutely, positively has to be there to prevent the rest of the law from being thrown out. That's not something that's baked into the Constitution.

But, then again, I could be wrong.

30 The prospect of a lame duck term for him is truly fapworthy.

If that happened, then odds are 1:1 I'd get to see the SCOAMF go after Tapper with TOTUS. 

I was just checking out Insty and he posted a note from a reader saying that it feels like 1914 and he's wondering who the Archduke will be.  I agree there's that sense in the air.  I would say that if Obamacare is upheld, then that may be the match to the fire.  I recently saw that something like only 17% of the country believes that the current government has the consent of the governed.  If Obamacare is upheld, then there's not even a pretense that we're a free people.  And then fwwooooosh.

I never wanted to live in interesting times. 

31 ban warning

32 I think a couple things are happening here:

1. I think they want this to play out sooner, rather than later.

2. They are hoping they can build enough support/pressure to get Justice Thomas to recuse himself (a. He won't and b. They overestimate their ability to make this happen - especially now)

3. Delusions of Adequacy. (SCOAMF)

4. They might have something sneaky or even completely dastardly planned to create a vacancy on the court. This is my longshot guess, and while I doubt their competence, I don't doubt their willingness.

33 >>I never wanted to live in interesting times.



Helloooo

34 How about Justice Keegan Excercise? Al Sharpton seemed to be calling for Thomas to recuse himself, for some reason or another. How about a former member of the friggin maladministration?

35 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

36 Dangit.

I go to work and miss a Sarah Palin thread.

37
But that's still not good for him. Now he's got to impose even higher taxes.

Posted by: ace at September 28, 2011 07:13 PM (nj1bB)

Not good for him? 

He'll be gone and we're all stuck with the higher taxes.

38

And then fwwooooosh.

The suspension of elections would also do it.

And you know that's a curse, not a toast, don't you?

39 Posted by: steevy at September 28, 2011 07:18 PM (fyOgS)
Thanks for the reminder!

Obama 2012--he needs to keep doing those jobs Americans won't do!

40

They might have something sneaky or even completely dastardly planned to create a vacancy on the court. This is my longshot guess, and while I doubt their competence, I don't doubt their willingness.

Oh Jesus. Not that I haven't of it, but oh Jesus.

41 Ok, and if they uphold it?

Posted by: Native Americans at September 28, 2011 07:04 PM (s1vtf)

I will be piffed.

42 @41: All it would take would be some nut, acting on his own. But of course, we could on the GOP to put up a huge resistance to any radical leftist wise Latina nominee... Oh! Snap!!

43 Obama 2012: SCOAMF and Change!

44 Can the Supreme Court just kick this can down the road with- not ripe or something?

45 Healthcare is a fundamental right. It is right in the Bill of Rights between the right to collect unemployment and the right to not be bullied. Duh!

46 45 Can the Supreme Court just kick this can down the road with- not ripe or something? Posted by: tasker at September 28, 2011 07:27 PM (rJVPU) I heard some analyst or another on the radio say they could say Obamacare has to be implemented before it is subject to judicial review.

47 Has anyone noticed the distinct lack of big headline polls on America's feelings towards ObamaCare? Anyone want to guess what the headlines and polling would be if a (R) law was headed toward a date with destiny in the SC...?

48
1. I think they want this to play out sooner, rather than later.

That's a theory at Kos, too. However it ends, make it a year-old issue by the time Election Day rolls around.

49 CoolCzech Yep. That's what I'm wondering... Didn't they write ObamaCare so that it doesn't come into effect until 2013.

50 Obama 2012:  I Promise I Won't Fuck Your Ass With This Flaming Pineapple This Time!

51 I hope it's ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS.

Kagen should recuse herself because of the work she did as solicitor general for 0bama in regard to the passage of 0bama care.

52 That's a theory at Kos, too. However it ends, make it a year-old issue by the time Election Day rolls around.

Posted by: arhooley at September 28, 2011 07:30 PM (0Kwjq)

If they started it right now they wouldn't rule until June is what I have heard.

53
I heard some analyst or another on the radio say they could say Obamacare has to be implemented before it is subject to judicial review.
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 28, 2011 07:28 PM

But with two federal courts making two different rulings on it, doesn't it have to be . . . straightened out, or something?

54

>>>>I heard some analyst or another on the radio say they could say Obamacare has to be implemented before it is subject to judicial review.<<<<

That's true of TAXES, but as we all know, Obama and the Democrats swore up and down that this wasn't a TAX, but INSURANCE (just like Social Security was supposed to be)

55

Honest to God, and I mean this in the nicest and politest kind of way,

 Just fuck these people....just fuck em. Run roughshod over the electorate, ignore our pleas not to do this, Harry Reid, bragging about opening up Obama's Christmas present and being "amazed and beloved" about everything in the healthcare package." Just Fuck Em!

56 arhooley I dunno but Bench Memos @NRO seems to think because the DOJ has asked for a ruling that makes it more likely to be heard... I expect SC weasel-don't they hate to wade into these things like the plague?

57

If they started it right now they wouldn't rule until June is what I have heard.

Posted by: robtr at September 28, 2011 07:31 PM

Yeah, scratch that. I can't remember what I read, but the "sooner the better" theory holds over there.

58
I expect SC weasel-don't they hate to wade into these things like the plague? Posted by: tasker at September 28, 2011 07:34 PM

That's my impression.

59 Under a socialist system, would hookers be cheaper? And would they be their own pimps since they own the means of production?

60
Didn't they write ObamaCare so that it doesn't come into effect until 2013. Posted by: tasker at September 28, 2011 07:30 PM

2014 fully implemented, but I thought some provisions were kicking in already.

61 eh - I don't think it will go down like that, Ace.  I think instead that if SCOTUS strikes down ObamaCare, Obama will turn it into a referendum on SCOTUS.  "See that Scalia guy?  He's gettin' kinda old, ya know..."

62 We already KNOW how every  SCOTUS justice will vote, except for Kennedy.  The other 8  might as well all recuse themselves.

63
I think instead that if SCOTUS strikes down ObamaCare, Obama will turn it into a referendum on SCOTUS.  "See that Scalia guy?  He's gettin' kinda old, ya know..."
Posted by: chemjeff at September 28, 2011 07:38 PM

Eh, he can call the SCOTUS every name in the book but he can't DO anything about them.

But if they won't hear it, and at least one federal court has ruled it illegal/unconstitutional, doesn't that halt its implementation?

64 Really?  Rdbrewer puts up a headline that Huntsman won't make the next debate, and the article title even in the link itself is that he will make the debate.  That's just pathetic, and pointless to put up at all.

65 You are all a bunch of bitter clinging racists! You just can't stand to have our first Black President have a substantive victory and provide healthcare for the millions of uninsured Americans. You people are absolutely vile and heartless. You are willing to sacrifice people to die just so you can eviscerate this landmark piece of legislation and deny President Obama the win. President bravely stood up to Big Insurance, Big Pharma, and Big Tonsil and brought healing to the poor. How dare you reich wingers play political games and drag Healthcare Reform through the courts. Every second and every dollar that is spent defending this awesome piece of legislation will result in more people dying. And all because you hate the black man. Clarence Thomas should recuse himself from sitting on this case since his wife is a white Teabagger.

66

Surprise witness for the defense -- Mitt Romney...

67 I think we should disband Art. III courts so the president can focus on the economy.

68 How the fuck did the NFIB get past the New Black Panthers? Aren't they guarding the SC steps? Were they all giving interviews to Terry Gross? Christ, this DoJ is completely pathetic. Does anybody do anything but give interviews and play chestless beer pong?

69 Sometimes the news depresses me so much I can't listen anymore. I'm glad this is going to the SC. I think our side will be energized no matter the outcome. We will be vindicated or fighting hard to reverse the outcome. We will be energized whatever the outcome. THIS is our battle! May we rise up to the challenge!

70 2014 fully implemented, but I thought some provisions were kicking in already. Yes, the taxing has already begun on tanning and medical devices--another reason there has been a loss of jobs. Boston Scientific has already laid off a bunch of people in their pacemaker division.

71 2014 fully implemented, but I thought some provisions were kicking in already. ...makes you wonder f they didn't want people to know what's in it until after The One is re-elected. btw-Randy Barnett did a post on this at Volokh but closed comments. I thought the Volokh blog was libertarian and pro-free speech...

72 I thought the last ruling was that the states don't have standing.

73 I thought the last ruling was that the states don't have standing.

Posted by: tasker at September 28, 2011 07:48 PM (rJVPU)

Now I'm really piffed!

74

Got to the last thread late.  OT, but I read over at the Hill that Cain said today he would not support Perry if he was the GOP nominee BUT he would support ROMNEY!!!  Did you guys see the article?

Cain, suffering from a bout of stupidosity and inflated ego, said he just couldn't get past the in-state tuition thing and he believes Romney, the creator of MassCare, would repeal Obamacare.  He did say if he see's Romney waivering on that that he'll pull his support.  Waivering on repealing it when - after Romney's elected?

FUCKING.  A.

75 SHARK JUMP ALERT Hotair just put up a headline that Cain would refuse to support Perry if he's the nominee. As far as I'm concerned, this is Cain's Tardisil Moment. Good night, Herman!

76 Posted by: Ghost of Kim Novak at September 28, 2011 07:57 PM (8DdAv)

Since when?

77

Posted by: Abe Vigoda at September 28, 2011 08:02 PM (L+jqr)

I went to the Perry apologizes link on Drudge, which took me to the Hill.  On the right side of the video box there are listings of articles.  It said Cain will not support Perry.  Evidently, he said it today in some interview.

78 This ObamacommieCare thing is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Named after a SCoaMF.

79 Posted by: Ghost of Kim Novak at September 28, 2011 08:08 PM (8DdAv)

No, no I mean your a ghost.
What in the hell am I still doing here?

80 A couple O-bot acquaintances we have are getting wilder and wilder in their support for the SCoaMF.

He is the last blade of grass on the edge of the cliff and they are holding on for dear life.

I LOL.

81 So now Obamacare is in the Supreme Court's hands? Start doing your Kegel exercises, America.

82

I have a theory that I have not seen anywhere else, but I think is correct...or it might be stupid....you tell me....

The Obama Administration has declined an application for en banc
review of Obamacare by the 11th circ. court of appeals.  Instead,
requesting transfer to SCOTUS.  The silly common wisdom here is that
1) Obama wants to defend the law and a delay would push the SCOTUS
review into 2013, thus under what might very well be a Republican
Administration, and 2) he is, of course, very confident of victory and
this shows it.

Neither of these are right.  Obama needs the economy to correct itself
before Nov. 2012...or he is out.  Getting SCOTUS to overturn Obamacare
is exactly what he needs to have happen in roughtly June of 2012.  He
knows Obamacare is a huge albatross on business (or at least he has
been told that) and there will be an immediate (if only psychological)
rebound from the overturning of Obamacare.  Plus, he can get out of it
with clean liberal hands -- "I tried to help you, but these bastard
conservatives on the SCOTUS killed our healthcare reform, etc., etc.
and it would have been GREAT!!!"  See, if it dies in June -- then he
can claim how awesome the would have been.  He obviously has no
problem bludgeoning the SCOTUS when he doesn't like their decisions
(see Citizen's United shots in the State of the Union Address).

Obama wants SCOTUS to kill Obamacare, I guarantee that is the
political and legal calculus behind this decision....

83

Posted by: Ghost of Kim Novak at September 28, 2011 07:57 PM (8DdAv)

I'm not dead yet.

84 Not dead and still hot

85 _{So now Obamacare is in the Supreme Court's hands? Start doing your Kegel exercises, America.}

_{Posted by: Empire of Jeff is in BEAST MODE at September 28, 2011 08:28 PM (z/Mo}

I still have the seat cushion I was sitting on election night 2008 clamped in my ass cheeks.

Nothing is gonna make it let go but Obama getting fired.

86 I still have the seat cushion I was sitting on election night 2008 clamped in my ass cheeks. Respect.

87

I'm not dead yet.

Posted by: Kim Novak at September 28, 2011 08:32 PM (1kwr2)

I get that allot.

88 Regardless of the ruling, doesnt this put Obamacare front and center of the discussion for much of the election season - not sure Obama wants to lead with his chin.

89

Posted by: Abe Vigoda at September 28, 2011 08:22 PM (L+jqr)

No, I am not dead and yes I am hot.  And you are still here.

90 Why would the SC take into consideration the NEED for healthcare reform?  One of the circuit courts mentioned in their holding that it is an issue that the SC will deliberate on.  I thought that they ruled on constitutional issues.  Why is reforming healthcare a constitutional issue?

91 Yeah, Cain's shaping up to be another Tea Party endorsed fucking loser. And don't forget, pass the FEMA bill and pay for it later. Eff him.

92

Some of the law kicked in last year, last September people's policies had to cover chidren up to age 26!  In January they removed OTC products from FSAs so that they could get more $ in taxes from us. They also made the max an employee can contribute to be $2,500. It was up to the employer up until then.  OTCs cost a lot, if you get a prescription for something you can buy OTCs.

These people are deviants, I'm sure they wanted it to be in SCOTUS now. I won't be happy until Obama is out of the White House, and takes all his Chicago dirty pols with him.

93

Republican Nominee, Mitt "I'm not a Reagan Republican" Romney

The guy who literally gave us Obamacare is going to be the nominee of the Republican party.

And tell me, PLEASE, what in the f**k is Romney going to do besides lower corporate tax rates and protect those entitities that are already "too big to fail" ?

Not a g***amn thing, that's what.  There are two classes of people in America nowadays: those who are "too big to fail" and those who are "too small to matter."  

Both parties spend all of their effort trying to convince us that the other "small people" are the ones destroying the country.  Fuck that.  I know exactly who's ruining America, and it isn't the school teacher down the street, or the small business guy who lives next door, or the single mom who lives kiddie corner to me.  It isn't the blacks, or the Mexicans, or the Jews, or the Arabs. 

It's the no good, money-grubbing, busy-body, nanny-state loving assholes who run my state and federal government.  It's the son-of-a-bitching Wall Street scum who blew up the economy and came running to the American people for bailouts. 

There are two cities where these assholes primarily congregate.  Screw them.

 

 

94

Posted by: BrotherJ at September 28, 2011 08:28 PM (/lB/H)

Yes, that is how I see it too.  The Obama administration knows nothing they do will help the economy, but if they get the court to scuttle Obamacare, then the economy will start to improve and they might get some credit for the improvement.

I do not think the country is dumb enough not to notice the relationship between our current problems and Obamacare, if that happens, but you never know.

And what other chance do they have?

Obamacare goes down, economy improves, the pressure on Obama is lifted somewhat.

 

95

94-- At least Romney was a Republican... Perry was a Democrat all through Reagan's term.  He supported Gore against Bush I.

After Nixon, lots of Republicans became independents.

Romneycare: power flows from the people to the government, Romney gave the people what they asked for.

Obamacare: So what if the people don't want it!   The power of government takes care of the poor little people who don't know what is good for them.

This is what no one seems to get.

The people of MA asked for what Romney gave them.  He isn't Obama, he didn't shove anything down anyone's throat. 

Why is Romney's respect for the power of the people to choose what services their state provides so threatening?

It is the polar opposite of Obama's philosophy.

 

96 Honestly, people who equate Romeycare in Mass. with Obamacare simply have no understanding of federalism and how our Republic is suppose to work. 

97

Petunia:  Why is Romney's respect for the power of the people to choose what services their state provides so threatening?

So why doesn't that apply to the Texas Dream Act?  or is it only RINOs that get that kind of pass?

98 Petunia:  The way I see it is that the federal legislation puts the onus on the states and the prominent health insurance companies in those states to have ONLY insurance coverage that is a premium package.  This insurance covers almost everything imaginable, and is very expensive.  Really, there is no choice.  Just higher deductibles.  And even then, it is quite expensive.  So, anyone stating that the states will handle it better than the feds, are just "stretching" the truth.  The states will mandate the SAME coverage the feds tell them too (or else). So, anyone with income over 96K better worry.  Their employer will dump them onto the exchanges, and the gov't will not subsidize it.  I am already in this pickle, and it is going to be a game-changer for a lot of families, as they will find out how much health insurance REALLY costs.  So, getting a state waiver does nothing for the residents of this state if they already have exchanges.  Exchanges are Obamacare.

99 "Posted by: petunia at September 28, 2011 11:40 PM (hgrmi)"

Can't say I agree with you.  I think forcing people to buy health insurance when they don't want to is quite wrong.  Constitutionally, I think it's legal for MA to do this, but it's still stupid and it's still wrong.  Romney also raised taxes and spending and banned guns.  He's a balls to the wall liberal until the day it's inconvenient to his politics.  At that point, he goes from hellbent pro choice to hellbent pro life.  He completely reinvents himself, and is completely inauthentic.  Thus, I just don't know what I get if he's the next president.  I Suspect a weakling with no character.

Rick Perry has a more impressive life story.   Yeah, he was a Texas democrat in the 1980s, which is more conservative than a MA Republican has generally ever been.  Big deal.  You say he was a democrat in the time of Reagan, but Romney specifically disclaimed a return to Reagan type politics.  He loses the 'reagan' test to just about anybody.

Romney explained he wanted to see Romneycare nationwide, and then deleted that wish when the polls said otherwise.

We need someone who is a little more forthcoming about his views.  Beat Perry up all you like, but at least the dude is owning his silly bleeding heart policy like a man.

Haven't all GOP nominees other than Romney pledged to repeal Obamacare?  Romney has some kind of mealy mouthed comment about it.  Why?  So he can excuse himself when the polls say he should.

If you care about this country, vote for Perry because Perry knows how to get jobs.  Romneycare=MA nearly last for jobs.  Obamacare=low jobs for the USA, and only a fool thinks Romney will have the spine to lead the fight against Obamacare.

Take it from Romney's pal T Paw. 

100 osted by: stickety at September 28, 2011 10:07 PM (FUDwf) Direct hit! You win a kewpie doll! Take it a bit further, as was posted in an earlier thread, election cycles don't mean a whole helluva lot. The real power is in the entrenched bureaucracy. They are lifers and anything anyone does to cut off the blood supply to the cancerous tumors they are will be fought tooth and nail.

101 Let us hope and pray that the supremes bolster their frame of reference prior to deciding this eminent case by studying our founding documents in the context of their meaning when written, not what current wordsmiths writhe. When hypothesizing whether Obamafuckedupacare will be struck down, a few things come to mind: -the continued health and well being of certain of the supremes -the downward spiral of our country should it be upheld -the largely unspoken fact that Obama can't wait until our republic is in such tatters that communities must be organized in the extreme PS. Does anyone else hate it that Obama gets autocapitalized on iPhone???????

102 I have our Constitution, Declaration and Bill of Rights hanging in my main floor/guest bathroom and my family and I study them frequently. When my guests comment, I am only too glad to tell them why. I look forward to removing the Constitution from the crapper as soon as we remove the communist from the White House.