1 - 5
The reason Obama supporters like Obamacare is that they're not paying for it -- or at least they don't THINK they are. They believe the taxespenaltiesfees in the law all apply to other people, while they themselves will receive all of the benefits. Truth be told, when you're given benefits paid for by other people, and you have the moral backing of the federal government in that endeavor, you can steal and feel good about it. Obamacare must be repealed in its entirety -- period. Fortunately the path to dumping this horrific monstrosity isn't complicated at all, and I detail it at http://www.tenthamendment.net/home/story.asp?postid=17.
There's nothing about Obamacare's survival that's going to galvanize Democrats -- they were handed a victory. The law already exists -- there's nothing "new" there to vote "for". Republicans and independents, however, who are overwhelmingly against the law, DO have something to vote for: repeal. I think it's fair to say that 2012 will look a lot like 2010, and in a presidential election, that would translate to a 7-8 point victory for the Republican. The head-scratching SCOTUS decision analysis: http://www.tenthamendment.net/home/story.asp?postid=15
From a constitutional standpoint, the point of view in this story is just plain wrong. What's all bad about Roberts' opinion is that it betrays the very fundamentals on our Constitution by fully misunderstanding Article 1, Section 8 and its general welfare clause, perhaps in a way never done before. Nothing good comes from that. Complete analysis here: http://www.tenthamendment.net/home/universal-health-care-insurance-mandate-constitution.asp
I’m trying to understand how the federal government claims — and the Supreme Court upholds — the right to block Arizona from trying to survive. The right of survival is paramount in all things (so long as you don’t kill someone/something else to make it happen, of course). If the federal government claims all power over immigration, then refuses to use such powers, then refuses to allow Arizona to step in and do what IT needs to do, then Arizona has, in essence, been sentenced to death. More analysis here: http://www.tenthamendment.net/home/story.asp?postid=14&story=arizona-immigration-law
I’m trying to understand how the federal government claims — and the Supreme Court upholds — the right to block Arizona from trying to survive. The right of survival is paramount in all things (so long as you don’t kill someone/something else to make it happen, of course). If the federal government claims all power over immigration, then refuses to use such powers, then refuses to allow Arizona to step in and do what IT needs to do, then Arizona has, in essence, been sentenced to death. More analysis here: http://www.tenthamendment.net/home/story.asp?postid=14&story=arizona-immigration-law
1 - 5