The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Making ObamaCare Constitutional

Posted on | March 28, 2012 | 5 Comments

by Smitty

Here is a short clip, via Breitbart, of two modern Liberal sophists trying to dance around the un-Constitutionality of their puropse:

What is the proper way for them to achieve the aim?

Article 5 – Amendment
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

We’ve had the bulk of FDR’s Second Bill of Rights as a slow-motion suppository over the last four score years. It has, perversely, proven unaffordable. The real aim of the SCOTUS, I predict, will prove to be rejecting ObamaCare, while leaving as little opportunity for further restoration of liberty through rejection of the rest of the New Deal/Great Society/Bogus Idea parade of the last century.

The only correct way to pull off an idea of the scope of this Second Bill of Rights is to have a Constitutional convention. The last 80 years in this country, and the cratering of the Social Democratic state in Europe, are evidence that these ideas are too big and to complex to be rammed through over a weekend in the form of unread legislation, or shenanigans such as FDR’s infamous court packing scheme. When your cause is just, you don’t have to resort to tomfoolery. Conversely, the kind of circumlocution we see with all of these shiny Progressive ideas, their enactment, and their subsequent economic fallout is a clear indicator that the Progressives are full of hooey.

Also, nice Jonathan Edwards reference by Erickson, “Sinners In the Hands of Anthony Kennedy“.


5 Responses to “Making ObamaCare Constitutional”

  1. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    March 28th, 2012 @ 12:59 pm

    I am dizzy from all the spinning!  Make it stop!  Make it stop!  

  2. Chas C-Q
    March 28th, 2012 @ 2:24 pm

    The reference to a Jonathan Edwards in context with the Great Progressive Project first put me in mind of the song “Sunshine”:

    “? … He can’t even run his own life, I’ll be damned if he’ll run mine! ?”

  3. Adjoran
    March 28th, 2012 @ 3:19 pm

    There is never going to be a Constitutional Convention.  It’s a bigger fantasy than Santorum winning the nomination.  The Founders just sort of put it in there, but forgot to dot the i’s and cross the t’s.

    How many delegates does each state get?  How are they selected?  Can you imagine the feuds over this alone?  What rules do they use to adopt the rules?  The courts wouldn’t intervene – thank God – because no one could demonstrate any standing or any loss.

    But suppose it all just fell into place – any amendments that managed to pass still need to be ratified by 38 states.  If there are amendments which could be so broadly ratified, they could have been passed by Congress instead, and saved the struggle and cost of a convention.

    A Con-Con is just another magic pill fantasy, the shining panacea on a hill that will solve all our troubles and bring peace and prosperity, etc. 

  4. McGehee
    March 28th, 2012 @ 5:11 pm

     I can remember when constitutional conventions were the terror under the bed for conspiracy types, since “as soon as it convenes, the existing Constitution is a dead letter.”

    I could have had a fulltime job pointing out exactly what you say in the first sentence of your third paragraph.

    The second sentence in your first paragraph, on the other hand, is an unnecessary attempt to provoke an off-topic response that would render the substance of your entire comment moot.

    You might want to give that some thought in the future.

  5. smitty
    March 28th, 2012 @ 5:31 pm

    My response is that the CC is the correct way to do what the Left pursues, and the current, alternative course is illegitimate from the outset.