Supreme Court Oral Arguments on ObamaCare – Open Thread

The Supreme Court is halfway through its 3 days of oral arguments on the constitutionality of ObamaCare, highlighted by this reaction from Justice Anthony Kennedy:

Justice Anthony Kennedy, a possible swing vote for the court, was rigorously challenging Verrilli. Kennedy said he needed to answer a “very heavy burden of justification” to show how the Constitution authorizes Congress to require that individuals buy insurance or pay a penalty.

At one point, Kennedy said the mandate changes the relationship between citizens and the government “in a fundamental way.”

Lots of news on this, and judicial bloggers are having a field day.  Good time for an open thread.

187 thoughts on “Supreme Court Oral Arguments on ObamaCare – Open Thread

  1. J. R. Babcock March 27, 2012 / 1:03 pm

    Bloomberg is doing live blogging on oral arguments.

  2. dbschmidt March 27, 2012 / 1:38 pm

    I know that it is an impossible dream in this day and age but this should be a 9-0 against the Constitutionality of what is know as Obamacare.

    • doug March 28, 2012 / 1:58 am

      Stevens would have been with Thomas on this one, too bad Kagan is there, she is obviously a pro-Obamacare vote. Most likely in order, to say the mandate is unconstitutional:

      Clarence Thomas, the man.
      John Roberts
      Samuel Alito
      Antonin Scalia
      Sonia Sotomayor
      Anthony Kennedy
      Ruth Bader Ginsburg
      Elena Kagan
      Stephen Breyer

      6-3 the outcome, 7-2 is an outside possibility. Won’t be 5-4.

      I loved how the Supremes have slammed Obama a couple times lately with the 9-0, maybe that indicates that Roberts and Ginsburg have convinced the rest that they have to show solidarity where the politicians aren’t.

  3. Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 1:45 pm

    George Will discusses an aspect of ObamaCare that I hadn’t given much thought to before.

    On Monday the Supreme Court begins three days of oral arguments on Obamacare. The justices have received many amicus briefs, but one merits special attention.

    Up to now, most attention has been given to whether Congress, under its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce, may coerce individuals into engaging in commerce by buying health insurance. Now the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public interest law firm, has focused on this fact: The individual mandate is incompatible with centuries of contract law. This is so because a compulsory contract is an oxymoron.

    • dbschmidt March 27, 2012 / 5:45 pm

      I have a feeling that is why the administration keeps calling the means of payment various things; a tax, a fee, a fine, etc. because one of the founding principals of contracts, and contract law is that both parties have to enter without coercion or force–of their own free will so to say.

  4. J. R. Babcock March 27, 2012 / 1:50 pm

    Ya gotta love it when you see comments like this from liberals: (from Bloomberg’s live blogging)

    1:36 p.m. More from CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin: “This was a train wreck for the Obama Administration.”

    • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 4:05 pm

      If the SC upholds it maybe we should have a constitutional crisis when several states, claim states rights and order their citizens to ignore it.
      And order the local sheriff to arrest any IRS enforcers on their states soil……..verrrrrrry interesting..

      • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 4:12 pm


        we KNOW that wont happen as a REPUBLICAN governor and a REPUBLICAN AG wont protect one of it’s states citizens from a howling MOB of chicago racist black panthers who have put a BOUNTY one one of our citizens, and the rest of the out of state race pimps on FLA soil demanding a political LYNCHING during a racist WITCH HUNT?

        WHERE is OUR FLA state police?
        our FLA national guard?
        our local sheriff?

        again REPUBLICAN elected officials bending to the out of state lynch mob rolled up on the floor in a corner sucking their thumbs while repeating La La La I CANT HEAR YOU.

      • Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 4:19 pm

        And order the local sheriff to arrest any IRS enforcers on their states soil

        Neo, I could actually see that happening, particularly in Texas and Arizona.

      • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 4:24 pm

        Video: High school students protesting Trayvon Martin shooting ransack store in Miami.

      • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 4:25 pm

        that is coming my friend
        but before that the US spring has arrived in Fla.

      • Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 4:31 pm

        but before that the US spring has arrived in Fla.

        Who’d have thought Mexico might be safer than Florida for spring break?

      • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 4:35 pm

        yeah with all those white hispanic racists they have there in Mexico…..LOL

      • Robin Naismith Green March 29, 2012 / 8:52 am

        Neocon, what’s a more serious crime property damage or murder?

      • neocon1 March 30, 2012 / 8:13 am

        rubin nitwit greenteeth

        murder? says who?

        are you referring to LEGAL self defense during a FELONY BATTERY?
        you live in the wrong state…the state of confusion and ignorance.
        Or were you referring to the HIRE for MURDER – CRIME by the racist terrorist group the black panthers?

  5. bardolf March 27, 2012 / 5:11 pm

    IF the supreme court overturns Obamacare what will the GOP field say is their goal for the future?

    Obama can argue that he was trying to help more Americans get access to health care and the conservatives justices on the Supreme Court got in his way. (Clinton got reelected despite a health care fiasco.) He can point to his ” successes” e.g. killing Bin Laden, the slowly growing economy, the big increase in the stock market, ending the war in Iraq … Now partisans will seek to label all of these either irrelevant or the doings of other people, but that argument won’t resonate with the electorate.

    Does the GOP just go full speed ahead with Mitt and lose in November?

    • Cluster March 27, 2012 / 5:22 pm

      IF the supreme court overturns Obamacare what will the GOP field say is their goal for the future? – barstool

      Free market reforms. And that IF should be lower case.

      Do you remember back in 2004 during the Bush/Kerry campaign when Kerry was lamenting the conditions of the VA hospitals, and how badly they were run and operated?? That’s government run health care stool, what makes you think Obamacare will eventually be any different.

      If you really wanted to make access to health care more widely available and affordable, you would insist that government programs for those in need are administered at the state level, and that current regulations on private insurance are reformed, so that insurance companies can compete nation wide. Competition will bring down price, and improve access and service.

      Once things like fast & furious and the blatant crony capitalism within the Obama regime are exposed (things the media is keeping under wraps), I think Mitt will win in a landslide.

      • bardolf March 28, 2012 / 12:05 am

        I’ll bet you a six pack that Obama beats Mittens.

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 11:23 am

        I owed you one and you never collected…….

      • bardolf March 28, 2012 / 1:52 pm


        I’m making a little collection!

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 8:03 pm


        on the super bowl?
        glad you dont remember, now im off the hook….

    • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 5:38 pm


      lower the cost of energy by exploration, development and free enterprise. ( Uboma is against that 100%)

      cut corporate taxes to intensify growth (uboma is against that)

      cut foreign aid to countries that are, or support our enemies. IE all islamic countries. (Uboma is 100% against that)

      stop the fraud of AGW and spending to thwart that fraud (Uboma is against that)

      I could go on for days…..

      • bardolf March 27, 2012 / 11:53 pm

        Mitt is going to run on that sorry list?

        With a huge capital surplus why would a corporation not use a tax cut to buy commodities? This whole tax cuts spur the economy is a platonic ideal.

        Why is it the US governments job to lower the cost for BP or Shell to find oil to ship to China at 120 dollars per gallon?

        Not one idea to enlarge freedom for citizens. How about getting rid of DOE TSA ..

      • GMB March 28, 2012 / 2:03 am

        “Not one idea to enlarge freedom for citizens. How about getting rid of DOE TSA ..”

        Power. Power over the citizen. The repubs, especially the liberal repubs like Romney, want that power just as much as the donkeys do.

      • bardolf March 28, 2012 / 10:57 am

        per barrel not per gallon

    • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 5:40 pm

      TAX paying people with jobs can contribute towards private affordable health care policies.
      the rest?
      get a job.

    • dbschmidt March 27, 2012 / 6:17 pm


      Let us take a closer look at your statement.
      “Obama can argue that he was trying to help more Americans get access to health care and the conservatives justices on the Supreme Court got in his way. (Clinton got reelected despite a health care fiasco.)”
      You can count on that being his argument. HillaryCare (unelected at the time) was the same fiasco this is. Truth is HillaryCare / ObamaCare has nothing to do with health care but everything to do with control over more people. People remember, and if not should be reminded, of the nanny state control aspects in addition to the rationing of care, the 1/2 trillion taken out of MediCare, etc that this boondogle is.

      He can point to his ”successes” e.g. killing Bin Laden
      This one I will give him but he neither killed Bin Laden and by many reports was hesitint and dragged off the golf course for the photo-op. I give full credit to Seal Team 6 and I will give a simgeon to Obama’s claiming of credit for “pulling the trigger” (just like the Somili priates) after the site was found using intellegence just a few years earlier Liberals and Progressives were claiming was tourture and un-Constitutional.

      the slowly growing economy
      Just like FDR? It caused the depression / recession to last longer than it would have without the “help.” I do not want to be a flat-lined Japan after they have spent the last 10 years showing what Obama did (and does) does not work.

      the big increase in the stock market
      Sorry, Obama can not claim credit for the entire market and it appears he is doing everything in his power along with Sunstein to destroy it. It has gone up in spite of Obama.

      ending the war in Iraq
      Once again, Obama did no more than follow the timeline set forth by Bush and decided against his Generals in the field to stay longer. Now, Obama can claim credit if Iraq slides back into a real sh*thole.

      • bardolf March 27, 2012 / 11:47 pm

        You just did what partisans do. You gave no credit for the good things that happened on Obama’s watch.

        You have economic theories which say the economy isn’t growing quickly because of Obama’s policies and the stock market is growing quickly in spite of his policies.

        I don’t understand your Iraq comment. Are you saying that if Iraq turns into a sh@thole that is a credit to Obama? Otherwise you are saying if things turn out well it is Bush’s fault and if badly itnis Obama’s fault. Doesn’t matter, Iraq is already a disaster and it is both presidents faults. Still, only expensive contractors getting shot at for the TV viewer.

      • dbschmidt March 30, 2012 / 1:25 pm


        Sorry for the delayed response but I had some real work to do. I gave Obama all the credit he deserves which was making the command decision to take out Bin Laden whether he actually made it or was “forced” into it because it is one thing to order the attack but this was over the border in a sovereign nation to boot. Same with the Somali pirates.

        My theory on economics isn’t going to win any prizes but it does have a great deal to do with what I have seen and learned about yet we seem to be repeating despite history. FDR extended the great depression with his Keynesian economics just as Obama is and Japan has done as well. When government gets out of the way entirely (search for Depression of 1920-1921) the economy recovers faster from a deeper hole than the Great Depression.

        “Too big to fail” has to be the dumbest statement I have heard in my lifetime but more to my po9int is that if any President cannot stop the fall of the market and reverse it almost overnight–then they cannot be given full credit for the rise either. They can only be given credit for making a business friendly environment to help small businesses and I haven’t seen one of them [Presidents] since the first term of Reagan.

        Finally, as far as Iraq or any conflict–the rule should be, and most Presidents understand, they make the executive decision to enter the conflict but once they release the hounds of war–sit back and take you hands off. Let the Generals run the show. Don’t disagree for political expediency which Obama has done both in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  6. Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 5:39 pm

    We all remember SanFranNan saying “we have to pass the healthcare bill to find out what’s in it”. It seems like each day we find something new.

    President Barack Obama has justified the mandate in his health-care law that requires individuals to buy health insurance by arguing that it will eliminate free riders—that is, people who get health care (often from emergency rooms) but, lacking insurance, never pay anything back into the health-care system.

    “So that’s why the individual mandate’s important,” Obama explained in a speech on Aug. 15, 2011.

    “Because the basic theory is, look, everybody here at some point or another is going to need medical care, and you can’t be a free-rider on everybody else,” said Obama. “You can’t not have health insurance, then go to the emergency room, and each of us, who’ve don the responsible thing and have health insurance, suddenly we now have to pay the premiums for you. That’s not fair. So, if you can afford it, you should get health insurance just like you get car insurance.”

    However, in the Supreme Court on Monday, Justice Samuel Alito forced President Barack Obama’s solicitor general, Donald Verrilli, to admit that under Obamacare these free riders will not be eliminated despite the individual mandate.

    For an elite group—including people eligible for Medicaid who don’t sign up for it and people whose health care expenses exceed 8 percent of their income—the Obamacare mandate is no mandate and the penalty is neither a penalty nor a tax because they are not required to pay it, period.

    Under Obamacare, Verrilli conceded, these people can continue to receive free health care care, not sign up for health insurance, not sign up for Medicaid, and not pay a penalty.

    • Cluster March 27, 2012 / 5:50 pm

      That sounds about right. After all, democrats still need victims to retain power. Without victims, there wouldn’t be a democratic party.

      Liberal governance just defies common sense and is often times surreal. I mean next thing you know, the Black Panthers will be encouraging militias and offering bounties on people they don’t like……….oh wait.

      • Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 6:15 pm

        Speaking of “bounties” — up to $1 million now. Houston, I think we have a problem.

      • Amazona March 27, 2012 / 10:03 pm

        Heard that Trayvon’s social media ID (Twitter?) was no_limit_nigga.

        That personal ID, gold teeth, tattoos, school suspensions—I can see why they are just printing a very old photo of him.

      • neocon1 March 30, 2012 / 8:17 am


        and the necessary pants down 10 inches and the undies fully exposed.. flashing gang signs while shirtless…NO thug there eh?

    • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 6:07 pm

      EPA to kill new coal-fired plants through first-ever greenhouse-gas regulations

      aint communism and the destruction of America grand?

      • Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 6:14 pm

        Good thing they’re not going to be needed to charge the Chevy Volts that no one is buying.

      • dbschmidt March 27, 2012 / 11:10 pm

        Doubt if the new Chevy Volts will ever need to be charged. Stopped production and the very limited sales to the 1%’ers that could afford them means that by the time the “uber-rich” trot out their latest display piece for how much they love the environment–it will probably burst into flames and they will have a good old fashioned weenie roast.

  7. Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 6:36 pm

    I’ve figured our Lefties would come out of the woodwork for a chance to defend free healthcare. They must have all gotten stuck in the unemployment line.

    • Cluster March 27, 2012 / 6:46 pm

      They are all busy marching in the streets with their hoodies on.

      • Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 7:00 pm

        I see Obama’s “never-let-a-good-crisis-go-to-waste” policy is still in play.

    • bardolf March 28, 2012 / 12:13 am

      Obamacare was always a mixed handout, no single payer option pretty much made the plan unworkable from the beginning.

      I do wonder how many righties will come out for having their own free health care taken away. maybe they are at the pharmacy getting free Medicare refills.

      • Cluster March 28, 2012 / 8:01 am

        Because health care isn’t health care unless it’s completely dominated by government?? Is that your point?

        Question: if recipients are required to pay into a system for their entire working life, for a promised benefit when reaching a certain age, can that benefit be considered as being “free”?

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 11:27 am


        free medicare?
        I just picked one and my CO pay is $20.00 so keep up the BS because you obviously know NOTHING about it.

      • bardolf March 28, 2012 / 1:58 pm


        so I want government health care where I only have a co-pay. Then it won’t be free either, right


        if recipients are required to pay into a system 1, but then they get system 2 beyond that (e.g. medicare part D) one can say they are getting free health care

        anything you didn’t pay for and you get is free


        no takers among the oldies for having the benefits above their contributions taken away, more of the usual we paid into a system at gunpoint yada yada yada

  8. Cluster March 27, 2012 / 6:59 pm

    Well the democrats finally got up off their ass a submitted a joke, I mean budget:

    The proposal adopts much of President Obama’s job-creation agenda, including tens of billions of dollars for near-term stimulus spending on infrastructure and other federal programs…

    And it only adds $6 trillion to the debt over ten years!! Isn’t that exciting?

    Rep. Chris Van Hollen said his proposal “stands in clear contrast” to the GOP bill,

    Yes it does.

    • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 7:35 pm


      ahhhhhhhh the “good old days” of the democrats and HOODS…….
      some things never change but the color of the HOODS, they are still 100% donks and hate filled racists.

      • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 7:41 pm


        dumbed down useful idiots in charge of the asylum……..America how far you have fallen in just 60 years…sad

  9. Cluster March 27, 2012 / 8:31 pm

    The SC’s questions and responses today do not bode well for Obamacare.

  10. steelhead March 27, 2012 / 8:49 pm

    I have been pretty much absent from b4b so maybe I missed it, but I see no sign of enthusiasm for anyone running on the GOP side. Sure there is no absence of Obama Tourette’s syndrome but no enthusiasm at all. What’s the matter? Mr. Etch a Sketch doesn’t get you revved up? Why don’t you jump on the Santorum bandwagon? He says more things that are in line with the commentary of the residents of this site. So why no enthusiasm?

    • neocon1 March 27, 2012 / 9:02 pm

      we have no candidate yet…the enthusiasm will come.

      is the debacle in Fla the democrat enthusiasm? or the OWS?

      Oh wait they are both the same

      Trayvon Martin rally infiltrated by Communists, Occupy Wall Street activists

      Call it a match made in liberal heaven.

      Although Jesse Jackson and former Democratic Congressman Alan Grayson were late in attending a rally for Trayvon Martin in Sanford, FL, members of the Revolutionary Communist Party USA and Occupy Wall Street activists were on hand, according to the Daily Caller.

    • Cluster March 27, 2012 / 9:05 pm

      I can only speak for myself steelhead but I just don’t get that excited over any POTUS unlike liberals who fawn over simple minded rhetoric. To me the position of the POTUS is simply a matter of hiring the right person for the current requirements of the job. Right now, the primary scope of work for the next president will be to repair the economy. Mitt is qualified.

      • Amazona March 27, 2012 / 10:07 pm

        What???? You don’t need to swoon, burst into hysterical tears, have tingles running up your leg, to make a decision about which of two political systems you think would be the better choice for the country?

        Clearly you are not a Liberal. But then they don’t think about ideology, they just think about the person.

      • dbschmidt March 27, 2012 / 10:58 pm


        “…revved up”, “jump on the…bandwagon”, “no enthusiasm” are not requirements when one makes a logical decision about electing the next leader of the free world. I am coming around to see Mitt as the choice, both in experience we (USA) needs at this time and having the fiscal wherewithal to withstand the onslaught of misconceptions, misdirections, and outright lies that will be the primary. Just watch “The Road We’ve Traveled” for all a preview of the aforementioned. BTW, where is Swift complaining about the plagiarism of that monumental piece of ____.”

        Just as a BTW–Gilles de la Tourette syndrome, GTS or, more commonly, simply Tourette’s or TS is an inherited neuropsychiatric disorder. Not too funny to those that suffer but what one expects from lefty.

      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 10:28 am

        db, I don’t think you were on the blog yet when a Lib referred to “turret syndrome”. I don’t know when I laughed so hard.

    • Retired Spook March 27, 2012 / 10:54 pm

      I’ve voted in every general election since 1966 and every primary except one. The ONLY Presidential candidate from either party that I was ever excited about was Reagan. As Amazona said, excitement is more of a Liberal thing. It’s how we ended up with the current sorry ass excuse for a CIC.

    • J. R. Babcock March 27, 2012 / 11:13 pm

      I see no sign of enthusiasm for anyone running on the GOP side

      There’s more enthusiasm on this thread for any one of the GOP candidates than there is enthusiasm from Lefties for ObamaCare — which is the topic of this thread.

    • J. R. Babcock March 28, 2012 / 9:38 am


      Believe it or not, there actually ARE some people who are really enthusiastic about Romney.

  11. dbschmidt March 27, 2012 / 11:20 pm

    Even though I will wait for the decision (probably July) and read both the opinions (That is a great deal like waiting for all of the evidence before putting a bounty on someone’s head for you lefty’s) –it sounds like it is going against the individual mandate with many (smarter than me) thinking it may be a 6-3 or even 7-2 decision against.

  12. dbschmidt March 27, 2012 / 11:25 pm

    It is a tad unfortunate that just days after the White House embraced the term “Obamacare”…a majority of the nine Supreme Court justices have given strong indications they will rule it unconstitutional.

    Even more ironic is that the justices, or five of them at least, look like they might force President Barack Obama back to the drawing board partly on the basis of the argument one Senator Obama made against then Senator Hillary Clinton in 2008.

    Hmmm, Do as I say?

    • Cluster March 28, 2012 / 8:32 am

      Here’s the money line from your link:

      I (Obama) am now in favour of some sort of individual mandate as long as there’s a hardship exemption.”

      The little known secret about Obamacare is that not everyone is subject to the mandate. The lower incomes, not sure where the line is drawn, are exempt from the individual mandate – so once again tax payers will be paying for the health care of others just as they are today with the added benefit of being “fined”.

    • dbschmidt March 28, 2012 / 11:52 am

      The future of Obamacare if it is upheld?


      Then take a look at an article (opinion piece?) from The Telegraph failing to the point of rationing and this is the lefties shining example of nationalized health care–the NHS of the UK

      Why should fat people take precedence over the elderly in the NHS?
      by Cristina Odone

      “Even the most sentimental champions of the NHS recognise its dark side. Given that its Chief Executive Sir David Nicholson has demanded a £20 billion efficiency saving if the NHS is to survive, and that demographic changes mean millions more elderly people will rely on its services (and space), the NHS can only do one thing: ration.

      If rationing is acceptable, though, scapegoating is not. And too much evidence points to the elderly being the scapegoats in the battle to save the NHS.

  13. steelhead March 28, 2012 / 1:38 am

    You all should go back to August 29, 2008. I suspect many conservatives used very similar words to describe their excitement over Sarah Palin. But you go ahead and continue to claim calm, unemotional, judicious manner when making a choice for president.

    Anyway, you are missing the point here. I don’t see anyone making an argument for their candidate and trying to convince anyone to see things their way. Sure there is plenty of the usual Obama bashing but it seems that isn’t going to change anyone’s mind here. Or perhaps neocon still hasn’t made up his mind about Obama.

    If its not about the person you should have already made up your mind by now. Each of these candidates has a record that would indicate how closely their actions match up with your belief system. That should be enough. Or perhaps any incremental improvement over Obama is good enough for you even if that person relies on their cult of personality more than their principles?

    • Canadian Observer March 28, 2012 / 7:49 am

      “You all should go back to August 29, 2008. I suspect many conservatives used very similar words to describe their excitement over Sarah Palin. But you go ahead and continue to claim calm, unemotional, judicious manner when making a choice for president”…Steelhead

      I do remember the Tea Party folks going bonkers over her; a veritable lovefest. There are still those who continue to worship at her altar and praise to high heaven every Facebook pronouncement she ‘writes’. The blog, Conservatives4Palin, is dedicated to keeping her on a pedestal and feel that she is the only person in the Republican arena today who is capable of defeating that Muslim/Fascist/Commie/Appeaser in the White House. In their worshiping eyes there is nothing that Mama Grizzly cannot do. She is their modern day Esther and will deliver the country back into the hands of ‘Real Americans’. Oh yeah, the Right Wingers are about idealogy and not the person. Right, Jeremiah?

      Amazona can remain oblivious and continue to blather on and on about how it is only the Liberals who emotionally select their leaders but we’ve seen for ourselves how foolish that notion actually is.

      • Cluster March 28, 2012 / 7:58 am

        Actually it’s liberals that are far more obsessed with Palin than conservatives are. They make movies about her, they still parody her on SNL, they still talk about her on MSNBC and as you just did, etc, etc.

        The liberal obsession with Palin is actually a little strange.

      • Cluster March 28, 2012 / 8:18 am

        And liberal obsession with Dick Cheney is equally disturbing:

        Leave it to the crass Daily Beast (and Newsweek) to accuse Dick Cheney of a “dick thing” for refusing to take himself off a heart transplant list and die

        In fact liberals are disturbing – obsessions and all

        Read more:

      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 10:54 am

        steelhead, WE DON’T HAVE A CANDIDATE

        We have offered our opinions here, for months, on who we think would make the best candidate, and why. But thanks for offering your take on “if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it….” with your “if discussions are held on the blog and steelhead is not there to read them then do they really exist,,,” attitude.

        One of the things that carried through those discussions was the belief that any of the POTENTIAL candidates would be a vast improvement over Obama.

        And that belief is based on the reality that, to one extent or another, each of these people represents the system we think is the best one to govern the United States. And Obama represents the system we absolutely believe is the worse system for governing the nation.

        Our belief is based on the historical fact that our Constitution, when followed, allowed the people in this country to create the most economic prosperity in the history of the world, while enjoying the most personal liberty, and the historical fact that the Leftist system of massive federal power and control has never led to anything but loss of personal freedoms and decreased economic prosperity.

        It is based on the historical fact that when the United States actually considered the Constitution the rule of law, and abided by it, we were strong and wealthy, and when the Leftist model of collectivism and redistribution of wealth started to erode the Constitutional rule of law we saw the nation weaken and lose its economic momentum as the result.

        This is why we will support whoever is the candidate. Sure, each of us has an opinion about which candidate would be the strongest supporter of the Constitution, which would lead the nation most energetically back toward a Constitutional rule of law, but only after that single attribute is considered do any of us even bother with appearance, personality, or any other superficial characteristic.

        We start at the bottom of our pyramid, that of political ideology, and work our way up through the other characteristics till we get to the smallest and least important, which is personality or charisma or whatever you want to call it.

        Your preference puts this as the foundation for your decisions, and you make it clear here that ideology is not only the least important of your considerations, it is usually not considered at all, not even to the point of understanding it.

      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 10:57 am

        Oh, CO, do give it a rest. Your peevishness is tiresome.

        While conservatives can and do get excited over some candidates, it is because the candidates represent a system we agree with, not because of their appearance or skin color. Only an utter fool could try to deny the blatant appeal to emotion that marked the entire Obama campaign—the tent-revival style of speaking, over speakers set to reverberate his voice, the women in the front rows fainting away on cue so he could repeat the same line of “can we get a little help over here”, and so on.

        And you bring the same shrill hysteria to the hate side of your positions, too. Just look at your laundry list of complaints about Palin. It is nothing but a litany of nasty hate, and not a word in it relates to any reason anyone on the Right liked her, or still likes her. Not a word in it relates to her political philosophy, which is what makes her attractive to the Right.

        It is just another creepy peek into another creepy mind of another creepy hatemonger.

        And an example of how you people become so fixated on the trivial (“Mama Grizzly”) that it dominates whatever it is that passes for thinking.

      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 11:04 am

        Cluster, it is obvious that many on the Left, if on a board allowed to decide if Cheney should be allowed to get a heart transplant, would have voted “no” , many claiming that this would be based on his age and not on personal hatred for the man.

        Which tells me that these same people would be in the group of people from whom panels making these kinds of decisions would be drawn.

        Which leads us to the confirmation of the “death panel” comments the RRL and PL sneered at for so long.

        Every one of these people would have sentenced this man to death, based on arbitrary feelings about whether or not he “deserved” to live, some using age as a criterion.

        Now, what’s that I have been saying about abortion proving that to the Left life is only a right for those who have reached a certain age? Here is another example of age being the criterion for the right to life. So the Left has life bracketed—too young, you have no right to life: Too old, you have no right to life.

        But they absolutely believe that those two criteria will never move closer together, much less expand to include other criteria, such as intelligence, productivity, mental health, etc.

        Or political or religious belief.

      • Majordomo Pain March 29, 2012 / 8:17 am

        “In general, I have no problem with Sarah Palin. Hell, I’d take her experience over Obama’s any day. I remember watching her give her speech and the 2008 Republican National Convention and being 100% convinced we would win.

        Hey, things change. And there is a reality to face, and that she is as divisive a political figure as Barack Obama. Even within the Republican Party she’s a poison pill. Canonized and demonized by various factions that are equal in their convictions that is the right person to lead the party, and the wrong person.”–Matt Margolis.

    • dbschmidt March 28, 2012 / 9:24 am

      Quite a few on this blog knew about Gov. Palin before she was selected for the VPotUS candidate yet did not have “thrills running up, or down our legs.” It was her record both inside and outside the political arena including her efforts to rout corruption out of Alaska (both sides of the aisle) and her straightforward vision and talk about where we, as a nation, were at present and needed to go.

    • Retired Spook March 28, 2012 / 9:48 am


      Actually, during your absence over the last few months, there’s been a great deal of discussion about the pros and cons of each candidate, including the ones who have dropped out of the race. I find it more than a little curious that you come here, admit that you haven’t been here for a while, and then chide all the Conservatives here for not defending or being enthusiastic about a particular candidate — on a Supreme Court.ObamaCare thread, no less. What happened — did Media Matters suddenly come up with a little extra cash?

      The majority of the Conservatives here didn’t have Romney as their favorite in the beginning. And yet the majority of Conservatives are more enthusiastic about Romney than we were about McCain 4 years ago.

    • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 10:30 am

      Suspect away. Your suspicions are mere guesswork.

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 11:33 am

        or stupidity….I vote for the latter.

  14. Amazona March 28, 2012 / 12:03 pm

    And the Supreme Court justice who worked for the White House to promote Obamacare, who did not recuse herself from sitting in judgment on the constitutional legality of part of the program she worked on, is apparently still working on it, as seen by her efforts to bail, out Solicitor General Verelli, who was in the weeds with his argument.

    SOLICITOR GENERAL VERILLI: To live in the modern world, everybody needs a telephone. And the — the same thing with respect to the — you know, the dairy price supports that — that the court upheld in Wrightwood Dairy and Rock Royal. You can look at those as disadvantageous contracts, as forced transfers, that — you know, I suppose it’s theoretically true that you could raise your kids without milk, but the reality is you’ve got to go to the store and buy milk. And the commerce power — as a result of the exercise of the commerce power, you’re subsidizing somebody else –

    JUSTICE KAGAN: And this is especially true, isn’t it, General –

    VERRILLI: — because that’s the judgment Congress has made.

    KAGAN: — Verrilli, because in this context, the subsidizers eventually become the subsidized?

    VERRILLI: Well, that was the point I was trying to make, Justice Kagan, that you’re young and healthy one day, but you don’t stay that way. And the — the system works over time. And so I just don’t think it’s a fair characterization of it. And it does get back to, I think — a problem I think is important to understand –

    • Count d'Haricots March 28, 2012 / 2:09 pm

      I noticed that when Solicitor General verilli opened his mouth, there was a tattoo that read; Place Hook Here, and Kagen obliged while tugging the inept SG into the proper “Obama Approved” direction.

      Good for her, dutiful little judicial lightweight & Obama’s Gurl.

  15. Retired Spook March 28, 2012 / 1:21 pm

    From the “you-just-can’t-make-this-sh*t-up” file, we have this brain-dead statement this morning from Justice Sotomayor:

    10:55 am
    Wednesday’s Arguments
    by Louise Radnofsky
    Add a Comment

    Justice Sonia Sotomayor was first to interrupt the challengers’ lawyer Paul Clement, who is arguing that the whole law should be invalidated, shortly after he began making his remarks. “Why shouldn’t we let Congress” decide what to do, she asked him. “What’s wrong with leaving it in the hands of people” who should be taking this decision, “not us?” she continued.

    And this gem from Justice Ginsburg:

    11:07 am
    Wednesday’s Arguments
    by Louise Radnofsky
    Add a Comment

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has sought to argue that the most legally conservative position is to uphold the law. If the justices have to choose between “a wrecking operation and a salvage job, a more conservative approach would be a salvage job,” she said.

    • Count d'Haricots March 28, 2012 / 1:48 pm

      Oddly, they’re both arguing against judicial activism.

      The House is the People’s legislative representative and therefore she’s correct; why not let the People decide?

      The issue, and the answer is that the House decided against the expressed consent of the governed; the People.

      Second, and more importantly (if Sotomayor weren’t an idiot she’d know this) it doesn’t matter how many People want something, since 1804 her job is to match the law to the Constitution, both expressed and intended.

      Doncha love the most leftist Justice (Bader-Ginsberg) lecturing the Conservatives on the Bench about what a Conservative should think?

      There is a judicial philosophy that in any case where the Justices decision will cause more harm by following the Constitution, the Justices are obligated to elect to not do harm by not taking action. This is what a Constructionist Justice would do, but not what a Constitutionalist Justice would do.

      An example is Dred Scott; the constructionist argument was that finding in favor of Dred Scott would cause such a rift among the states, that the Court was obligated to sidestep the issue. Rather than deciding on the merits or strict application the Court found a way (Scott cannot sue as he doesn’t have standing; being a slave and a negro) to avoid applying a strict Constitutional standard to the overriding issue.

      But, not taking action creates, in many instances more harm than avoidance. And causes cases to be revisited by subsequent Courts after much damage has been done (Brown v. Board of education/Plessy v. Ferguson. de la Cuesta v. Fidelity Federal/Wellencamp v. Bank of America)

      • Count d'Haricots March 28, 2012 / 1:59 pm

        I noted this at Wikipedia; “Scalia noted that the Dred Scott decision, written and championed by Roger B. Taney, left the justice’s reputation irrevocably tarnished. Taney, while attempting to end the disruptive question of the future of slavery, wrote a decision that aggravated sectional tensions and was considered to contribute to the American Civil War.”

        Dear Justice Bader-Ginsberg,
        What unintended harm will befall the US should you and your fellows decline to act in a case of “salvage rather than damage? Are you willing to accept the responsibility of your inaction by ddressing the substance rather than the process?

  16. Retired Spook March 28, 2012 / 2:55 pm

    You think maybe the Left is becoming a little unhinged? All I can say is, bring it on, Malik, bring it on.

    • Cluster March 28, 2012 / 3:45 pm

      The black community is showing their true colors – no pun intended, and it ain’t pretty. You would think they would’ve learned something over the Duke LaCrosse case, and certainly the Tawanna Brawley case, of course that was a while back and liberals aren’t known for their retention skills.

      What’s that saying? Never let a good crisis go to waste?

    • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 8:11 pm

      dear malik

      YOU have already burned down detroit, LA. watts, st pete, NO, st louis etc etc etc etc SEVERAL TIMES since the 60’s
      but hey every one loves a nice bonfire……let the games begin but if you come into the burbs to loot and burn you will be met and sent to hell.

  17. Retired Spook March 28, 2012 / 3:07 pm

    From everything I’ve read, it seems to me that Conservatives are in a win/win position WRT ObamaCare. If it’s declared unconstitutional, we go back to square one and come up with something better. If it’s upheld, the fact that a substantial number of Americans are exempt from the penalty will lead to equal protection challenges, and probably a lot of civil disobedience. Fun times ahead.

    • James March 28, 2012 / 3:24 pm


      At this point, the individual mandate looks like it may not stand….i’d give it about a 40% chance of standing.

      If it is removed, and the rest of the law stands, it’s a win for the people. There are a lot of good things about the plan as of right now without the mandate being in effect.

      Also, the GOP had 8 years under the Bush administration and didn’t do a thing about the healthcare system. What makes you think they will now?

      If the law is completely upheld however, it will be a smashing victory for Liberalism and Progressives. Everyone should have insurance, and if they can’t afford it, subsidies will be given.

      Eventually, this will pave the way for a more accessible health system in our country.

      This whole talk about civil disobedience, and your almost giddy desire for conflict strikes me as false bravado. Just like Governor Wallace in the southern segregation days….you’ll stand aside and obey the law like a good grandpa.

      • Cluster March 28, 2012 / 3:43 pm

        I fondly remember just a few short years ago, how liberals and John Kerry were bemoaning the squalid conditions of the VA hospitals and the poor service vets were receiving.,On top of that, there are many current articles on doctors not taking on any new medicare patients, and in fact dropping medicare patients altogether because of the reimbursement rates, paperwork and turn around times, and those two programs are what government health care is, so when you say that if Obamacare passes it will be “smashing victory” for liberalism and progressives – I would have to agree. After all, the goal of universal health care was not to improve the actual care.

      • James March 28, 2012 / 4:32 pm

        talking points alert.

        the VA system is actually quite good. That’s a completely government run program. Some of the best care veterans get is in the VA system.

        Also, who cares what John Kerry said? Is he running for President and I missed it or something?

        With regards to the medicare lie you stated…well its a lie. Majority of doctors accept medicare. Sure, some don’t anymore, or drop out, but a majority still do. Hell, not everyone accepts Aetna insurance which I have…but that doesn’t mean Aetna isn’t any good. It just means its not accepted anywhere.

        Conservatives believe in the invisible hand of the market….except when it comes to issues they care about. obviously, getting everyone access (reasonable and affordable) to health care is not high on your list. I get it.

        James, you’ve got 3 hours from 5PM EST 3/28/12 to confirm from either one of the email addresses you use that they’re valid. Respond to by 8PM tonight or your comments and all future comments will be deleted.

      • James March 28, 2012 / 5:41 pm

        Done. I hope this puts to rest the ludicrous assumptions about me….

        Fair enough. Play nice and you can stay//Moderator

      • Count d'Haricots March 28, 2012 / 7:01 pm


        To my knowledge doctors aren’t “dropping Medicare patients” but an ever increasing number have opted out of accepting new patients. In some regions as of February 2012 less than half of the doctors are accepting new Medicare patients while continuing to care for existing Medicare patients.

        In some states doctors currently serving Medicare patients have already dropped below 50%, in almost every other state the number will be less than 50% in a few years through attrition.

        According to The American Medical Association 31% of more than 9,000 primary care doctors surveyed began to restrict the number of new Medicare patients in 2010. This is an increase from previous years from around 8% in 2007 and 19% in 2009.

      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 8:11 pm

        The people I know who go to the VA for medical treatment say it’s atrocious, and a caller to a radio show last week said he is a disabled vet whose local VA hospital turned him down for knee replacements because he is too young—he would outlive the knee replacements and the will only do it once, so he has to wait till he is old enough for them to expect the knees to outlive him.

        The only people with a “giddy desire for conflict” are the radical RRL and PL contingent, and racist blacks, two categories which usually overlap.

        “subsidies will be given” Love that passive voice. Yes, somehow, miraculously, they “will be given”. By whom? And who will pay for them? And with what money?

        James, you gloat over what you claim will be a “…smashing victory for Liberalism and Progressives….” Will you please define Liberalism, and Progressives, for us? You speak as if you know, so you are probably the one to educate the rest of us.

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 8:14 pm


      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 8:18 pm

        I wondered, when dolf was blathering on about “…the invisible hand of the market…” a few weeks ago, where the hell he got that goofy phrase. Lately it has popped up in posts from people who do not, as dolf does, deny being Liberals, so it must be one of those things uttered by some Lefty guru like Maddow and glommed onto by the Lemmings.

        “Also, the GOP had 8 years under the Bush administration and didn’t do a thing about the healthcare system. What makes you think they will now? ”

        I hope they don’t. Check out the 10th Amendment and then tell us what a GOP Congress, or ANY Congress, can legally do on the federal level about health care.

        Possibly, under the Commerce Clause, they could stop the practice of insurance companies only being able to sell in a few states and not others, thereby opening up insurance sales nationwide and and making insurance more affordable.

        Oh, they could also drop federal regulations forcing insurance companies to offer certain kinds of coverage, to bring costs down even more.

        Other than this, there is nothing Congress can or should do that I can think of.

      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 8:20 pm

        neo, let James define the system he so obviously believes in the best way to run the country. Now he will just bluster that since Liberalism is not the same as Communism—-and it is not—-he doesn’t have to answer anything.

        Just wait and see—my question will go unanswered.

      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 8:21 pm

        James, the only thing “put to rest” is that you have a valid email address. Big deal. That does not prove you have not posted before under different names.

      • Cluster March 28, 2012 / 10:12 pm

        James conveniently hides behind the “talking points” response when confronted with the reality of VA Hospitals and Medicare patients, and then fails yet again to answer the simple question of what liberalism/progressivism really is.

  18. Amazona March 28, 2012 / 8:24 pm

    Perhaps the Left has come up with “the invisible hand of the free market” to try to counter
    “the iron fist of the government in Leftist economics”.

    • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 8:30 pm



      OBAMA CAMPAIGN: Republicans ‘politicizing’ Trayvon Martin death…


      VIDEO: Dem Rep Kicked Off House Floor…

      Ex-Black Panther…

      Another Says Trayvon ‘Hunted Down Like Dog’…

      Another: ‘Executed For WWB In A GC’…

      Maxine Waters Calls Shooting ‘Hate Crime’…

      Elderly couple living in fear over erroneous Spike Lee tweet…

      Flee home…

      Spike refuses to apologize… Trayvon coverage killing local business…

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 8:44 pm

        Good GRIEF…………it is going to be a LONG HOT summer…….BUY your AMMO early.

        ‘My God Will Wipe’ the U.S. ‘From the Face of the Earth’: Scary Audio From GBTV Special on Farrakhan

        “If you choose to crucify me, know that Allah will crucify you.”


        Rep. Bobby Rush Explains Hoodie Incident to The Blaze: Martin Killed for Wearing Hoodie in ‘White Neighborhood’

        “Nothing but a piece of clothing.”


        Dem. Rep. Causes Chaos on House Floor After Giving Speech in a Hoodie

        “May God bless Trayvon Martin’s soul, his family and–”


        Minister Malik Shabazz Threatens to ‘Burn Down’ Detroit Over ‘White Supremacy’
        “What the fu** is a matter with you?


        Congresswoman Can‘t Quite Remember Name of ’Young White Female’ Murder Victim of Equal Concern to Martin Case
        “I care about all of the children.”

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 8:46 pm

        And the dumb ass winner ISssssss

        Sheila Jackson Lee Speculates That George Zimmerman Broke His Own Nose

        “You can knock yourself into a door…and break a nose.”

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 8:48 pm


        “If George Zimmerman broke his own nose then it’s obvious what happened to Treyvon Martin. He shot himself.”

        best one I heard yet………..

      • neocon1 March 28, 2012 / 9:06 pm

        A Brief for Whitey
        Mar 212008

        By Patrick J. Buchanan

        How would he pull it off? I wondered.

        How would Barack explain to his press groupies why he sat silent in a pew for 20 years as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright delivered racist rants against white America for our maligning of Fidel and Gadhafi, and inventing AIDS to infect and kill black people?

        How would he justify not walking out as Wright spewed his venom about “the U.S. of K.K.K. America,” and howled, “God damn America!”

        My hunch was right. Barack would turn the tables.

        Yes, Barack agreed, Wright’s statements were “controversial,” and “divisive,” and “racially charged,” reflecting a “distorted view of America.”

        But we must understand the man in full and the black experience out of which the Rev. Wright came: 350 years of slavery and segregation.

        Barack then listed black grievances and informed us what white America must do to close the racial divide and heal the country.

        The “white community,” said Barack, must start “acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination — and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past — are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds … .”

        And what deeds must we perform to heal ourselves and our country?

        The “white community” must invest more money in black schools and communities, enforce civil rights laws, ensure fairness in the criminal justice system and provide this generation of blacks with “ladders of opportunity” that were “unavailable” to Barack’s and the Rev. Wright’s generations.

        What is wrong with Barack’s prognosis and Barack’s cure?

        Only this. It is the same old con, the same old shakedown that black hustlers have been running since the Kerner Commission blamed the riots in Harlem, Watts, Newark, Detroit and a hundred other cities on, as Nixon put it, “everybody but the rioters themselves.”

        Was “white racism” really responsible for those black men looting auto dealerships and liquor stories, and burning down their own communities, as Otto Kerner said — that liberal icon until the feds put him away for bribery.

        Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America.

        Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.

        This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:

        First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.

        Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

        Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ’60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream.

        Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks — with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas — to advance black applicants over white applicants.

        Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.

        We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?

        Barack talks about new “ladders of opportunity” for blacks.

        Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown, and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for “deserving” white kids.

        Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America? Is it really white America’s fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?

        Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?

        As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?

        Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?

        We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena. And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.

        Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.

  19. bardolf March 28, 2012 / 10:25 pm

    I wondered, when dolf was blathering on about “…the invisible hand of the market…” a few weeks ago, where the hell he got that goofy phrase. – Amy

    If Amy could put down the Hunger Game trilogy aimed at junior high school girls and pick up Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” she would be better prepared to discuss things like an adult instead of the simpering, snotty, didn’t-quite-make-it-into-the-sorority caricature that she has become.

    I’ve never seen Maddow or other progressive personalities since I haven’t had cable TV in 20 years. I’ve also been spared FOX and CNN except for at the bank or airports.

    I’ve watched the GOP devolve into a pro-big government supporter of too big to fail business with dreams of empires and bad guys under every rock in the middle East. Trillion dollar wars with hundreds of thousands of casualties accomplishing nothing more than the enrichment of weapons manufacturers. Eroding liberties with junk like the Patriot Act, DHS, TSA, DOE, BATF… The only thing that the non-rigid B4V folds can offer are tax cuts for the top 10%, lowering the costs of oil companies making historic profits, sniping at Obama, anti-union cliches and on and on.

    That is a losing strategy in November. If Obamacare goes down, Romney has nothing to offer besides a faux immigration policies without teeth.

    Ron Paul 2012!

    • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 10:37 pm

      simpering, snotty, didn’t-quite-make-it-into-the-sorority caricature that she has become.

      Oh my, oh my, dolf does have his bitch on, doesn’t he? Guess being called out on using inane Leftist blather like “invisible hand of the free market” trips his teeny tiny trigger.

      Nice addressing of what I said, dolfie. Perhaps if you had a more eclectic reading and viewing life you would be just a wee tad bit less, shall we say, limited? As I read 2-4 books a week, it is not hard for me to get through a series, and as I don’t judge a book by its supposed intended audience but by its content I am not as limited as you apparently are.

      Uh, you might want to check out some more manly ways to insult, while you’re expanding your exposure to life beyond the staked plains. Your constant illustration of what you pretend to know about women, and how to insult them, says a lot about you, and (hint) none of it is muy macho.

      • Amazona March 28, 2012 / 10:40 pm

        BTW, if I were to waste any time speculating on your voice and speech patterns while you are giving your overbearing math lectures, I would have come up with someone who sounds exactly like querulous Ron Paul. I can see why he is so attractive to you—like listening to yourself, isn’t it?

      • bardolf March 29, 2012 / 12:50 am

        Amy pulls out the bitch word as soon as she’s shown for the ditz that she has always been. Typical vocabulary for those who Kap Kap Gamma ignored. 2-4 comic books per week, yet doesn’t know where the phrase “invisible hand” comes from. Snortworthy indeed.

        Do you still look at the pictures of Noah’s Ark in your DK Children’s Illustrated Bible too or have you moved onto the ideas? Not likely since your version of Christianity entails a self-aware constant self-improvement ala Transcendental Meditation. As a bonus, you are so wary of the actual ideas in the bible that when a “Lefty” like Dennis points them out you act just like a knee jerk liberal.

        BTW, don’t limit yourself to just picture books, there are ones to color in as well. I don’t need to look into insults. You come off as a condescending, brainless moron all alone. Your juvenile need to bring machismo into discussions, calling men catty or bitchy is 7th grade school yard fodder. The only thing even more juvenile would be forced phallic reference. “teeny tiny trigger” does the job nicely.

        The only thing funnier on B4V is when the Count comes onto the blog is his Ron Jeremy/Burgundy character and you swoon as his droppings.

        I feel sorry for GMB when he gets angry with you. He still believes your rants are your intellectual output instead of picked up talking points you have found meandering through the corporate conservative section at B&N. You can always be the B4V grammarian. That title is secure until Microsoft comes up with a decent grammar analog to spellcheck.

        Ron Paul 2012!

      • GMB March 29, 2012 / 2:06 am

        “I feel sorry for GMB when he gets angry with you. He still believes your rants are your intellectual output instead of picked up talking points you have found meandering through the corporate conservative section at B&N.”


        Don’t feel sorry for me at all. I never have believed any of her rants. I was just playing nice. No point in it anymore. Now that my friend is absolutely a zero sum game.

        Bardolf, you are rocking the boat. Be careful you don’t make them all seasick.

        Ron Paul over that damned dirty,filthy,stinking,lying,flipflopping piece of liberal garbage any day.

        Be good you all.


      • Amazona March 29, 2012 / 9:39 am

        dolf, if you see the term teeny tiny trigger as a phallic reference to you, well, you would know better than I. I meant that you are sooooooo hypersensitive that it takes practically nothing to nudge you over the edge into shrill hysteria and infantile name-calling.

        Which you were kind enough to prove, yet again.

        But if the reference fits………

        Yeah, you keep concentrating on elaborating on your silly theme of what I read, etc. True, I have not read Adam Smith. So sue me. You probably haven’t, either, but just picked up the term somewhere. I’m betting dennis hasn’t, either, but just googled the term. And anyone who has read the blog knows that GMB dismisses everything I say because I am not exactly precisely 100% with no margin of error in agreement with his rigid absolutism.

        I don’t understand why a man of your age and claimed achievements is so petty and strident about every little thing. But it doesn’t really matter. When I see you shrilly bitching away at the Count and then at me, I think I am in good company. If you are going to have a hissy fit every time someone points out your foolishness, you are going to spend most of your life pitching a hissy fit.

        Oh, yeah. You do.

        Given a choice of who I’d ask for an intelligent answer to a serious question, you and dennis would be at the bottom of the Slightly Less Than Raving Liberal List, while GMB would off in the weeds yelling at kids to get off his lawn.

        Give it a rest, guys.

        Now I’m going to run down to pick up a new BIG box of Crayolas—I hear there is a new My Little Pony coloring book coming out, if I can tear myself away from the “corporate conservative” section.

        Sheesh, you are a hoot. Nice snipe at someone in the private sector, though.

      • bardolf March 29, 2012 / 12:47 pm


        Look at your choice of words

        {hypersensitive, shrill, hysteria, petty, strident, shrilly bitching, hissy fit, …}

        These are words you use with the intent to think of yourself as one of the alpha bitches, hoping the cool kids will finally pick you to hang out with them. You need to see a shrink pronto if you believe any of this nonsense.

        I have actually read Wealth of Nations. I have also read the entire NIV version of the Bible. These aren’t beyond the abilities of intellectually curious people. IMO, there is no reason for adults to read things like the Hunger Games trilogy. The 2 or 3 rehashed ideas are better worked out in good literature so you should be reading that. FYI, UC Boulder has an annual Shakespeare festival you might want to attend. You might learn the humor of Falstaff and his compatriots.

        Click to access 2012%20web%20cal%20OK.pdf

        In the 1860’s the American public working through the government passed laws to enable great public universities like UC Boulder, Ohio State, Purdue, … to benefit the citizens. At the same time large chunks of land were given away in the Homestead Act also for the benefit of the hard working citizens.

        In 2012 the citizens of many states allow ranchers to use public land for grazing and support their public universities. My point is that neither of these decisions is a handout to some special class of people. Private scctor=good vs. public sector=bad is not particularly contextualized.

        I really don’t understand if you genuinely think your occupation is more dignified than a teacher at a public university. You certainly have no evidence of being more skilled than the majority of faculty members. I could parrot lefty talking points about government handouts to farmers/ranchers in the US so they can compete with Mexican farmers but that’s what the American public has decided. If the same society wants to privatize the university system I won’t shed a tear. Until then though, your Laura Ingalls Wilder routine is getting long in the tooth.

        “Long in the tooth” means old. It refers to the fact that one can determine a horse’s age by looking at its teeth. A horse’s gums recede as it ages causing its teeth to look “long.”

      • Amazona March 29, 2012 / 1:42 pm

        Actually, a horse’s teeth continue to grow and do, therefore, become longer. It has nothing to do with receding gums. Horses who grazed in the wild in the parts of the country where this usually occurred would usually grind the teeth down to some extent on rough forage and on sand picked up from grazing on low-growing forage but not always, and this led to early deaths for many horses, as uneven tooth wear could result in inability to chew.

        Responsible modern horsemen now have the teeth of their horses routinely checked, and ground down, or “floated:, to level the chewing surfaces and keep jaws from being locked out of a grinding pattern by having the outside of an upper tooth and the inside of a lower tooth lock together when the jaw is closed, inhibiting the side-to-side grinding pattern of chewing.

        This treatment means that most horses have a much longer lifespan than they would have had in the wild, and this means that as they reach greater age their teeth grow completely out, leaving the horse toothless. I have had many horses who have, due to good dental care, been able to eat well far into their 20’s, and then have had to be fed special diets to keep them alive and healthy once they no longer had molars with which to chew.

        I can share my recipes for aged horse diets if anyone is curious.

        BTW, the age is not determined by the length of the teeth but by grooves in the teeth, which become apparent at different ages.

        Boulder Colorado (AKA The Peoples’ Republic of Boulder) was in competition with Pueblo, Colorado, when state decisions were being made regarding where to site the state university and the state mental hospital. Boulder lost, and got the school.

        Though in the past few years, it has been hard to tell the difference.

        The Shakespeare festival in Boulder is quite nice, with plays held in a lovely little outdoor theater. I have also seen Shakespeare presented in the rebuilt (as well as could be determined by historical records) Globe Theater in London and once in Stratford-upon-Avon. But I still carry a small grudge against Will for his misrepresentation of Richard III, contributing to a very unfair perception of him throughout history.

        My perception of Christianity, and all other religious belief systems, has never been addressed by me on this blog, so speculation about my personal beliefs would range from mere guesswork to overt lying.

        I think working in the public sector gives most people a far greater exposure to reality than the relatively protected and insular life of a college teacher, especially one in a small remote city. I also note a sense of superiority and smugness among the self-styled “intellectuals” who have never competed in the private sector but assume greater intelligence, morality, etc than those who do.

        I prefer not to comment on, much less criticize, books I have not read. But then I also prefer not to comment on political systems I have not studied and for which I have not developed an understanding.

        I find it useful to, every now and then, examine the literature to which young people in our culture are being exposed, and more to the point, what literature appeals to them and why. I think it interesting that two of the most popular youth-oriented books or book series of the past few years, the Harry Potter Series and the Hunger Games series, both stress what are now considered old-fashioned values, such as courage, integrity, friendship, loyalty, personal responsibility and self-discipline. I suppose I could make sweeping generalizations, based on personal bias, about the youth of today or aspects of their culture, but once again I prefer to actually know what I am talking about, whether it be about youth literature or horses’ teeth.

        But it’s hard to compete with Archie and Veronica. Just the other day I read that Archie was very upset that Veronica had cut her hair, but it turned out that she had just bought a wig!!! It was brilliant. I laughed, I cried…….

      • bardolf March 29, 2012 / 2:29 pm

        ” I think working in the public sector gives most people a far greater exposure to reality than the relatively protected and insular life of a college teacher, especially one in a small remote city.” – Amy

        I travel several times per year abroad and read a broad spectrum of newspapers in several languages. I talk daily with people from China, Western and Eastern Europe and South America. I know hundreds of actual people from countries like Iran. I teach graduate courses in stochastic differential equations as well as bible study in a church regarded as ultra-conservative and most of my friends vote GOP. That is typical for a college professor. What reality about the world do you see that avoids my gaze?

        Your thinking is a tired cliche, separating people into groups just like a liberal. It makes you intellectually lazy.

      • Amazona April 2, 2012 / 9:48 am

        I also note a sense of superiority and smugness among the self-styled “intellectuals” who have never competed in the private sector but assume greater intelligence, morality, etc than those who do.

        Thank you so much for proving this point for me.


  20. dennis March 28, 2012 / 11:54 pm

    Ama: “inane Leftist blather like ‘invisible hand of the free market’”

    Ama, you can’t be helped, can you? Bardolf tried, but you’re too arrogant to listen. In economics, “the invisible hand” is a term economists have long used to describe the self-regulating nature of free markets. It’s hardly leftist blather – the term was coined in 1759 by Adam Smith in “The Theory of Moral Sentiments”, and later in book 4 of “The Wealth of Nations”. (And he may have gotten it from Shakespeare.)

    It’s sort of like Herbert Spencer’s term “survival of the fittest,” used even before Darwin’s “Origin of Species” came out. Darwin thought it was an apt summation of his own position and incorporated it into his fifth edition, and lots of people use the phrase now. “The invisible hand” has been used even longer – you just haven’t been paying attention. Wikipedia has a pretty good history of its useage.

    • neocon1 March 29, 2012 / 9:18 am


      Ama, you can’t be helped, can you? Bardolf tried, but you’re too arrogant to listen.

      Ohhhh PULEEEEEEASE !!!
      you and baldork “helping” any one is like the blind leading the blind running on a narrow winding maintain pass….. truly a WTF moment.

      the wolf in sheeps clothing continues to delude himself…..but dennis stooge we KNOW who and what you are…..ESPECIALLY Ama.

      • bardolf March 29, 2012 / 11:34 am


        It’s puhleease with an ‘h’. Try to say it while rolling your eyes at my comments and you’ll hear it clearly. Also, everyone should know the reference to the “invisible hand” was from Econ101 where the first lecture mentions Adam Smith. After reflecting on it Amy probably knew too. Like me, she just can’t resist doubling down on stupid remarks.

        BTW, You yourself have congratulated me for helping people on this blog. I have thanked Spook, GMB, Amazona, the Count, you and others for various help as well. Of course, you thanked me for helping someone with algebra, I thanked Amazona for farming advice (thanks again Amazona the local coop has chicken poop which goes on the garden this weekend!) , you for house repair, the Count for accounting … i.e. for our actual areas of expertise. GMB is the most useful for his advice to shut up and go fish or bake pies.

        Also, I was right about Je$$e and Al coming to FL, yes? Your fine state is being made to look like a bunch of racist crackers in the media. A jury will find Zimmerman guilty on some lesser accounts or not at all but the coverage will be enough to push FL into the Obama column for sure. Still can’t believe I got banned for a week for riffing on the idea that some people don’t belong in some parts of the country.

  21. dennis March 29, 2012 / 12:18 am

    More on that “invisible hand” from economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, who says “the reason that invisible hand often seems invisible is that it is often not there.”

    Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, is often cited as arguing for the “invisible hand” and free markets: firms, in the pursuit of profits, are led, as if by an invisible hand, to do what is best for the world. But unlike his followers, Adam Smith was aware of some of the limitations of free markets, and research since then has further clarified why free markets, by themselves, often do not lead to what is best. As I put it in my new book, “Making Globalization Work”, the reason that the invisible hand often seems invisible is that it is often not there. Whenever there are “externalities”—where the actions of an individual have impacts on others for which they do not pay, or for which they are not compensated—markets will not work well. Some of the important instances have long understood environmental externalities. Markets, by themselves, produce too much pollution. Markets, by themselves, also produce too little basic research. (The government was responsible for financing most of the important scientific breakthroughs, including the internet and the first telegraph line, and many bio-tech advances.) But recent research has shown that these externalities are pervasive, whenever there is imperfect information or imperfect risk markets—that is always. Government plays an important role in banking and securities regulation, and a host of other areas: some regulation is required to make markets work. Government is needed, almost all would agree, at a minimum to enforce contracts and property rights. The real debate today is about finding the right balance between the market and government (and the third “sector”—non-governmental non-profit organizations.) Both are needed. They can each complement each other. This balance differs from time to time and place to place.

    • neocon1 March 29, 2012 / 9:13 am

      and all along I thought “invisible hand” was a Karate term.


      that damned dirty,filthy,stinking,lying,flipflopping piece of liberal garbage any day.

      I wouldnt have been so kind to Uboma

  22. Cluster March 29, 2012 / 9:16 am

    I’ve watched the GOP devolve into a pro-big government supporter of too big to fail business with dreams of empires and bad guys under every rock in the middle East. Trillion dollar wars with hundreds of thousands of casualties accomplishing nothing more than the enrichment of weapons manufacturers. – barstool

    And yet another simplistic view from the cheap seats. I don’t deny that RINO’s like Collins, Snow, McCain, etc have compromised the conservative position on too many occasion, but to label the entire GOP because of the actions of a few is well….juvenile. I will also remind you that conservatives don’t oppose government, we oppose ineffective and over reaching government. And re: your juvenile take on war – if your friends in the ME would stop blowing people up, threatening other countries, stoning women to death, and beheading infidels, maybe we could avoid those messy wars. Ask your Mom about that someday.


    Joseph E. Stiglitz is a academia elite fraud. He is anti capitalist, of course everyone paid by tax payer money is usually anti capitalist, which is ironic considering that capitalists are the very people that pay their way through life. Much like Elizabeth Warren.

    • neocon1 March 29, 2012 / 9:30 am


      I believe both you and GMB are correct.

      GMB we are screwed this time but mittens has to be better than the commie racist we now have.

      Cluster there are a lot of GMB’s out there and rightfully so, maybe it is time for a third party….TEA already has a good start.

      This debacle in Fla has shown me the GOP governor, AG, FDLE, etc is a paper tiger hiding under the bed while racist howling lynch mobs scream for “justice” and demanding elected officials IGNORE Fla law to satisfy their blood lust and arrest a man for NO crime….AND NO GOP elected officials comment when out of state terrorists place WANTED DEAD or ALIVE BOUNTYS on Florida citizens..

      gov Scott are you listening?….DO WE have to do the job our selves?

      OH WAIT……you would throw the FULL MIGHT of the government against **US** right?……cant have any of that “vigilantism” now can…..CAN WE?

      • Cluster March 29, 2012 / 9:42 am

        I don’t disagree with GMB’s positions per se, I disagree with his scorched earth tactics.

        I am a methodical businessman, that plans my work and works my plan and there are many obstacles in front of conservatives including the media and a dumbed down populace that we have to overcome in order to get on the path to a sustainable conservative governance. We can’t just think in terms of one election, or even one federal election. We have to begin to change the media narrative, and improve our common sense message so that it resonates with more and more people who have been hood winked by liberalism. Conservatism is common sense that the vast majority of Americans can easily get behind, we just have to stop hanging ourselves with Rino’s like McCain, and promote those who can articulate our message – people like Ryan, Rubio, Bachman, Walker, Haley, etc. And that can not be done over night. Romney is conservative enough for me and if he wins, that gives us four years to start that process. This is a marathon – not a sprint.

      • Robin Naismith Green March 29, 2012 / 9:45 am

        No we cannot.

      • neocon1 March 29, 2012 / 11:05 am

        rubin nitwitgreenteeth

        tell that to the howling racist chicago mob in Fla who are on a witch hunt and political lynching.

        believe me if they start something they will regret it.

    • James March 29, 2012 / 9:51 am

      Stiglitz is a fraud? So a nobel prize winning economist is a fraud…..just because you don’t agree with him?

      Interesting. Talk about generalizations about people who get paid by tax money.

      So Police, Firemen, First responders and Teachers are all anti capitalist. Oh, so are all the guys in the military.

      Talk about being a narrow minded idiot.

      • Amazona March 29, 2012 / 11:04 am

        So being awarded the Nobel Prize is proof of something? You mean like Barry’s prize for what someone thought he might do, someday?

        The Nobel Prize has become a joke, a political construct that has less and less to do with actual merit and more and more to do with advancing Leftist causes.

        James, if you have even the slightest, most cursory understanding of the political philosophy of the Left, or even of reality, you might not make such bizarrely stupid statements as trying to claim that for some reason someone said or implied that “…Police, Firemen, First responders and Teachers are all anti capitalist. Oh, so are all the guys in the military.” For one thing, police and firemen ARE ‘first responders’—if you’re going to parrot a phrase, you might try to know what it means first.

        No one objects to people who get PAID by tax monies. No one objects to paying the military out of federal tax revenues. As a matter of fact, it is a constitutional duty.

        As for First Responders and other state and local employees, THEY ARE EMPLOYEES.

        And for the most part, these tax revenues come from capitalists.

        The objection is the handouts to people who do nothing to earn what they get, and to the fact that there is not one single word in the Constitution that assigns any form or degree of charity to the federal government. Charity, when it is called for, is clearly and legally, according to the 10th Amendment, the responsibility of the states. Or the people.

        Hell, people like you can’t even tell the difference between a federal responsibility, like the military, and state and local responsibilities, like firemen and policemen.

        You have been asked to explain what Liberalism is, and what Progressivism is, and you just refuse to answer. Why is that? Is it because you are ignorant of the definition and meaning of words you use? Or is it because you know that once you define a system you support, the next question will be “why do you support it” and you know there is no defense for the system?

      • Count d'Haricots March 29, 2012 / 11:08 am


        For the record, there is no Nobel Prize for Economics.

        What he “won” was the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, awarded, not by the Nobel Committee, but by a bank in Sweden.

        Do Carry On.

      • Retired Spook March 29, 2012 / 11:53 am

        For the record, there is no Nobel Prize for Economics.

        Count, you would think that the good folks at Columbia University would know that.

      • dennis March 29, 2012 / 12:28 pm

        My point by citing Stiglitz was that Smith’s invisible hand has been a known metaphor (of conservative doctrine, not “leftist blather” as Ama called it) for a long time. And yes, Stiglitz and others reject the assumption that the invisible hand always guides free markets to do the right thing. It would have been just as easy to cite Alan Greenspan from 2008:

        Asked by committee chairman Henry Waxman whether his free-market convictions pushed him to make wrong decisions, especially his failure to rein in unsafe mortgage lending practices, Greenspan replied that indeed he had found a flaw in his ideology, one that left him very distressed. “In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology was not right?” Waxman asked.

        “Absolutely, precisely,” replied Greenspan. “That’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence it [the invisible hand] was working exceptionally well.”

        And apparently Greenspan was still talking about Adam Smith’s invisible hand, even explicitly naming it, as recently as a year ago:

      • Amazona March 29, 2012 / 1:10 pm

        I am the first one to admit that I do not study economics. I believe I have mentioned this, or alluded to it in some way, several times on this blog. I have read Sowell on economics, but I tend to study more about political theory and history than economics, mostly because so many economists who appear to be equally qualified so often have such wildly divergent opinions.

        So I look at the historical record of different economic theories, and don’t spend much time reading about abstract theories.

        What is so funny is that I doubt that any of those opining on the horror—the HORROR, I tell you!!!!—-of my admittedly limited exposure to economic theory have read much on the subject, either. I did a quick google search on “the invisible hand of the free market” and came up with the same stuff regurgitated with such prowess by some who evidently lack the integrity to admit they didn’t know this stuff, either, till my comment and their desire to swoop in with insults nudged them into a similar search.

        But hey, if someone wants to call the natural instinct of mankind to trade and profit an “invisible hand”, more power to him. I may start to use the term myself: the “invisible hand” of migration, the “invisible hand” of maternal instinct, etc. You know, I’m starting to like it.

    • Retired Spook March 29, 2012 / 9:44 am


      From your Yahoo link:

      Democrats have defended Obama’s budget priorities but they largely voted “no” Wednesday night.

      Republicans said Democrats were afraid to vote for Obama’s proposed tax increases and extra spending for energy and welfare. Democrats said Republicans had forced a vote on a version of Obama’s budget that contained only its numbers, not the policies he would use to achieve them.

      The vote was 414-0.

      Yeah, I’d say 414-0 was pretty “largely”.

      • Amazona March 29, 2012 / 10:00 am

        Awww, those mean old ‘publicans, “forcing a vote”!

    • tiredoflibbs March 29, 2012 / 12:31 pm

      414 to ZERO?!?

      I thought that only REPUBLICANS were obstructionists?…….

      ….. at least that is how the dumbed down talking points for the ignorant proggies go.

      This is not the first time that the DEMOCRATS have whole-heartedly rejected obAMATEUR’s budget. Meanwhile, budgets that have passed the House are held up in the Senate by Harry Reid. He simply is refusing to allow them to the floor.

      But according to the mindless drones, it is the Republican’s fault that there has not been a budget passed for almost three years. When the record shows incompetent bills and partisan politics – both by Democrats.


    • neocon1 March 29, 2012 / 9:31 am


      he is a KO’s plant

      • Amazona March 29, 2012 / 9:50 am

        I don’t think dolf has the, uh, shall we say “spine” to be much of anything. He seems to like to lurk on the sidelines and then snipe at whatever some of us say. He is just mindlessly oppositional.

        but shhhhhhhhhh—-he is awfully sensitive

    • bardolf March 29, 2012 / 6:14 pm

      Clueless spends more time on DailyKos than I ever will. I’m willing to bet that Ron Paul is hated on DKos. Why don’t you go troll for a while and link to the pro-Paul threads.

      Of course, Olympia Snowe is the worst type of RINO, but she isn’t so far from Mitt or Newt or Bush Jr.

      It must get under your skin the idea that Libertarians and Social Conservatives don’t see eye to eye with too-big-to-fail business republicans like yourself. The government as an instrument for corporate America first, second and last.

      • Cluster March 29, 2012 / 10:08 pm


        I am a borderline libertarian but not nearly as extreme as Paul. Nothing is too big to fail including GM, which should have gone through bankruptcy instead of propping up the unions, and my opinion as to what conservatives need to do to reach their goal is centered around finding the right person for the moment as their is no perfect candidate. Mitt fits the bill for now.

Comments are closed.