I was at the range a few weeks ago with an attorney friend and between stations we were chatting about this and that. He is of the stated opinion (state right here on this blog in fact) that the Obamacare case which is about to be heard, is arguably the most important case in... I don't want to misquote him... I'm sure he'll speak up for himself. But he more or less said that it's a Super BIG deal - the Thunderdome of legal battles. (We were actually talking about NJ gun law when it came up.)
Knowing next to nothing about the practice of law, all I had to offer in response was a quip which I ripped off from Roy Cohn, the Machiavellian attorney involved in Joseph McCarthy's investigations into communist activity:
“I don't want to know what the law is, I want to know who the judge is.” he's credited as saying. That's how NJ law seems to be to me, and I don't think the the Federal courts are much different.
Charles Krauthammer seems to agree with me. He seems to think that Obamacare will be a 5-4 decision, and that it will inevitably depend on what side of the bed justice Kennedy gets out on. But being who he is, in the process he makes a number of excellent points of logic - as if anyone cares about that sort of thing.
They're fun to read anyway.
7 comments:
"1) Contraception, sterilization, and abortion pills are classified as medical prevention. On whose authority? The secretary of health and human services, invoking the Institute of Medicine. But surely categorizing pregnancy as a disease equivalent is a value decision, disguised as scientific. If contraception is prevention, what are fertility clinics? Disease inducers? And if contraception is prevention because it lessens morbidity and saves money, by that logic, mass sterilization would be the greatest boon to public health since the pasteurization of milk.
2) This type of prevention is free — no co-pay. Why? Is contraception morally superior to or more socially vital than — and thus more of a “right” than — penicillin for a child with pneumonia?"
I share this sentiment - as should anyone with a pulse or functioning neural synapse.
When the left trotted out that the Republicans want to deny women necessary preventative health care, I was gob-smacked!
how can a devout self proclaimed Liberal or Democrat or Human being for that matter turn to their own children or even their friends and justify this outrageous crock of shit?
For this one reason alone - if a Supreme Court Justice or a Politician truly believes The ability to conceive a child is equal to a disease, that person must be recused or removed from office.
I agree with Krauthammer - this is literally the turning point in the American Experiment.
If Liberals are so selfish as to consider humanity nothing more than chicken pox, the American Epoch is over. In a matter of 4 years. The libs will say this is "hysteria".... Are they nuts? What is next ... euthanasia for incorrigible children?
years ago I asked an MD what he thought of the morning after pill.
He said it was nothing more than human pesticide.
Maybe there is a reason I don't want to have children yet.
Is this not the "dark ages" the very same elite liberals are warning us about?
wow.... ikaika...spot on...unfortunately everyday they multiple like rabbits and conservs dont. its a numbers game their vote even if they dont speak a word of english counts exactly the same as yours.even if they cant pick out canada on a world map they can vote and it counts the same as yours. and odumass and the gov keeps em hooked on the narcs and freebies.and they vote and they multiply. im 58. never reproduced. 1 vote.. sheer numbers means its over.why work when the gov will hand out your tax dollars and some borrowed dollars from your kids fututure for them not to.??? its over... im hoping for a few ok yrs in the market and poof.
and 1 last thing bout judges.. i set here and read bout sec settling with bofa and citi etc. and then a judge rakoff says no. go back and do it better. hes not an economist. hes not trained in finance. hes a lawyer n now a judge. 2 sides have agreed on a settlement nad yet the arrogance of this pos to say "i know better"... he shud thank his lucky starts there are metal detectors in court..1 judge at a time
The cartoon attachment belies a sub-theme: That only by and through the Ivy League can one ascend to the heights of developing/implementing public policy. We have got to start installing judges, legislators, etc that come from a more working class background not just to be representative of the people but to bring some common sense to the fray. I am convinced that a good deal of our government-induced problems have their roots in a particularly pernicious brand of elitist hogwash that is cultivated and inculcated in the populations that attend these colleges. Notwithstanding the applied sciences, if I have to hear one more interview of some "important" commentator... "Rigley Smithers of the Kennedy School of Government decries the Israeli government's...quack quack, woof, woof..." Where's the loo, I think I gotta vomit.
anon......i agree 1000%.... as i have said here several times...GRUNT... common person and common sense.
It is the most important case we will see in our lifetimes. If it goes the wrong way - it is over. There will be no limit to the subjects that federal power may reach. None.
Krauthamer's thoughts will seem trite, when you consider all possible outcomes of a federal power to compel a private citizen to enter into an unwanted contract.
Read the concurring opinion of Justice Thomas in US v. Lopez and see how commerce power, through the grotesque manner the Court has viewed it since 1905, can swallow other constitutional protections whole. It is a monster.
Post a Comment