by Smitty
What a nauseating bucket of drool at The Hill:
| Pecquet | Smitty |
|---|---|
| Democrats on Capitol Hill are worried that the Supreme Court will rule against President Obama’s healthcare reform law. | The SCOTUS will rule in favor of the Constitution and liberty. Liberty, Mike Foxtrot: do you speak it? |
| Over the last couple weeks, congressional Democrats have told The Hill that the law faces danger in the hands of the Supreme Court, which The New York Times editorial page recently labeled the most conservative high court since the 1950s. | No the SCOTUS is supposed to protect the Constitution. Also, you seem to have conflated Appeal to Authority with Appeal to Clowns. You see, nobody that gives the likes of Krugman or Brooks the space to peddle idiocy has any credibility. |
| While the lawmakers are not second-guessing the administration’s legal strategy, some are clearly bracing for defeat. | Why should the administration, which peddles policies of failure, of which ObamaCare is just a particularly egregious example, expect to do anything but fail here? Does the administration actually want to succeed, and have the ObamaCare albatross perch upon #OccupyResoluteDesk? BHO, admittedly, whitewashes everything, but I’m not sure this was the whitewash which he sought. |
| “Of course I’m concerned,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). The justices “decide for insurance companies, they decide for oil companies, they decide for the wealthy too often.” | What is that supposed to mean? If the Justices are deciding cases based upon anything other than law, in the service of justice, then, by all means: let the Justices be impeached. Or did you read such drivel in the New York Times, Brown? Sure, Kelo, but does anybody doubt that the main beneficiaries of ObamaCare are the crony capitalists friends of the Administration? |
The Daily Pundit piles on as well.
A less idiotic take over at the WSJ, emphasis mine:
The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether ObamaCare is constitutional, granting certiorari in a case brought by 26 states shortly after that law was enacted in March of last year. In so doing, it will be ruling upon the very nature of our federal union.
One might be tempted to think that our leadership would agree. Yes, ObamaCare is a Big Biden Deal. So why did the Democrat-controlled Congress trie to back-door the legislation, and not offer an Article V convention? I sort of know the answer, but that is a rhetorical club with which these Progressive hacks should be flogged on a more or less endless basis.
Still more at Hot Air, which notes the following about Elena Kagan, whom I’ll dub #OccupySCOTUS:
Kagan has been exceedingly conscientious about recusals, perhaps more so than necessary. It’s safe to say that such scrupulous adherence to the judicial canon will work in her favor when she argues — or more likely her defenders, as Kagan is unlikely to directly address these calls — that she has no need to recuse herself in this case.
Ah, yes: play scrupulously by the rules, so that you have something at which to point when it’s time to cheat. The Lefty evil can at least be elegant upon occasion.
When the history of this administration is written, ObamaCare shall have proven the Battle of the Bulge. 2012 will be anything but boring.
via Instapundit