Crossing my Fingers on ObamaCare Repeal

By the Left Coast Rebel
Image Via RightKlik

If you didn't know, next week the Supreme Court is going to hear arguments (pro and con) on ObamaCare, aka the Orwellian-named "Affordable Care Act" that was forced, rammed, pork-barreled, bridge-to-nowhered down the American people's throat. I'm crossing my fingers that the High Court will at least shoot down the individual mandate, thus robbing ObamaCare of its key -- and only -- funding mechanism.

We shall see...



One optimistic indicator that I see on Memeorandum today is the left already calling the Supreme's potential striking down of ObamaCare "political."

For example, some lefty writer at Slate  is priming the pump of his fellow collectivist readers' ire and attention to the possibility that the five conservative Justices will strike the law down as a cynical bow to public sentiment, the rabid right-wing, tea party freaks (I'm paraphrasing but you get the point.)

I think this kind of sentiment on the left at least shows they think they might lose and they are already throwing the meme out there that (if) the Supreme Court strikes the law down, it was nothing more than overtly political move unrelated to ObamaCare's Constitutionality; ie. an "illegitimate" move on the Supreme Court's part, just like Bush v. Gore in 2000.

I'm heartened that I saw this today.

RELATED: James Taranto at The WSJ, "The Ineffective Greenhouse."

5 comments:

  1. Oh, did you hear that?

    That was the sound of you opening up this liberal/leftist/victimhood can of worms.

    You dare attack the individual mandate?

    I'm bringing popcorn and counting down until the leftist outrage hits LCR:
    5...4...3...2...

    ReplyDelete
  2. I give the individual mandate only about 25% chance of survival. The rest of the law, about 50%.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree on with the 25% on the individual mandate. The rest of the law I think has a little better than 50 - 50 chance of surviving.

      The individual mandate is the most egregious as it is unconstitutional, at least that's my take not being a legal scholar.

      Delete
    2. The main reason I would give the rest of the law only 50% of survival is because the Obama admin and congress went so far out of their way to say that the mandate isn't severable:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/opinion/the-severability-doctrine.html?pagewanted=all

      Delete
    3. Good point RK. I overlooked this. Without the mandate the law does become quite hollow.

      Delete

Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.