Great point. I agree that the whole idea behind ObamaCare is offensive to constitutional governance. I merely wanted to use a concrete example of the Courts recognition that the mandate was not a proper use of federal power.

Good point, yet I would argue that we need to make sure that we preserve the peace through strength, not weakness.

It shows that the debt limit increase bill was a bad deal for conservatives. Looking back, many Members of Congress who voted for the deal are now regretting that vote.

That is one way of saying it. I agree.

First, the taxpayers are backing the loans and if they are not repaid, then the taxpayers are on the hook. Second, the "bank" requested a bailout out by the taxpayers in 1987, so taxpayers have been asked to pay for losses. According to this story - http://articles.latimes.com/1987-12-21/news/mn-20449_1_export-import-bank - Ex-Im sought a bailout in 1987. The Reconstruction Finance Corporation was set up in 1932 by Congress, then FDR, in 1934, issued an executive order to allow loans to the USSR. You may be technically correct that the bank started issuing loans to foreign entities in 1934.

If the Ex-Im bank is doing so well, why are they requesting an increase in loan authority? Because they have loans on the books that are not making enough money to continue with a $100B cap.

If you read my post, you would understand that Obama opposed Ex-Im before he supported the terrible idea. The Export-Import bank is Crony Capitalism and Corporate Welfare.

Foreign government owned companies are not a good business model. These governments end up subsidizing lower priced products that help consumers, but artificially lower the price hurting the company at the expense of European taxpayers. Ex-Im is a socialist idea and your post reaffirms my belief that it is bad policy. What is so wrong with a truly free market and why should the US be copying the low growth policies of our European friends?

Zen would like the defining issue of this election to be a referendum on how big liberals can grow the government with higher taxes. Say you radically increase taxes on the rich. The Buffett Rule only raises about 47B over ten years. Our national debt today is about $15.7T and Obama's prolifigate spending will run up yet another $1T next year in debt. You liberals want to grow, grow, grow tax revenues, yet you don't have any ideas on how to cut government spending. Take your class warfare somewhere else.