Doug Schoen says that ObamaCare is an electoral disaster for the Democrats.
Good.
I think that this also shows that either Bill Clinton is a political fool, or that he thinks that the party needs a wake-up call like this to get rid of Obama and move away from its current leftist extremism, so he suckered them into it.
[Update a few minutes later]
This seems relevant to me — what happened to the neoliberals and free-market Democrats?
But…but Juan Williams has assured us that opposition to Obamacare is only from the echo chamber of old white people, so that doesn’t count. More importantly, our own wayward resident concern troll, Jim, assured us that people would like Obama’s sausage, so it must be true.
I think it is a mistake to campaign on the platform of outright repeal of Health Care Reform.
If I were running for office this year, I would show a clip of Candidate Obama opposing an “individual mandate” and then intone, “Help me support President Barack Obama and end the health-insurance mandate, inacted by an out-of-control Congress.”
If we can repeal the mandate, I think this will undo the worst part of it, which Mr. Obama, by the way, campaigned as opposing as part of his presenting himself has a thinking-man’s moderate.
The mandate will likely be struck down as unconstitutional, which it should be. Even Howard Dean doesn’t think it will survive.
Well, since it lacks a severability clause, there goes the whole shootin’ match!
“The mandate will likely be struck down as unconstitutional, which it should be. ”
“Well, since it lacks a severability clause, there goes the whole shootin’ match!”
I think having the Supreme Court strike down the Individual Mandate is wishful thinking — the Justices are a real wild card.
This is just my opinion, but the opposition to Health Care Reform should focus on the Individual Mandate and use sound bites of Mr. Obama telling us how he is opposed. Support the President and run against those scoundrels in Congress. Yes, this sound snarky, but I find it . . . Delicious!
Keep in mind that the SC levied the infamous Kelo decision a few years ago. Any hope that they’ll actually stand up for individual rights or the Constitution is wishful thinking. The Constitution only means what 5 unaccountable members of the Supreme Court say it means.
This seems relevant to me — what happened to the neoliberals and free-market Democrats?
Neoliberalism does not live at a time of war. Wars require some degree of self-reliance by nations, or economic blocks, to enable the safety of the supply chain of the military. Free-market policies are ill suited for it.
A cycle of massive investment will come soon. This investment is required in order to enact deep technological changes in the energy and transportation sectors. Military technology is also on the cusp of several major advancements which will make current hardware obsolete.
Many of these investments will be funded using state debt. Which means tax rates will have to increase way more. I expect this to happen within a decade.
Several things which may or may not happen will influence outcomes tremendously.
Imagine China invaded Taiwan. Taiwan has highly advanced semiconductor manufacturing technology which is presently denied by embargo to China itself. This could improve their electronics to a level similar to the US. Or imagine China invaded South Korea for some reason. South Korea produces some of the most advanced military hardware in the world today, including tanks, they also have the largest naval shipyard in the world. These countries (China, Taiwan, South Korea) manufacture most consumer electronics today.
I doubt China will go on such military adventures for the next 20 years or more. But I am sure it is on the mind of a lot of people.
what happened to the neoliberals and free-market Democrats?
The so-called “Progressives” sent them on the same one-way trip to the vet that so-called “Blue Dogs” took.
@Raoul Ortega — EXcellent, Raoul!
@Rand: I agree with Paul, and I would be quite happily surprised, shocked even, if SCOTUS struck down Obamacare.
On what grounds do you think they would do that, and what would the implications be for the rest of the bureaucracy?
We can hope but not depend on the supreme court. We should be on the attack on all fronts, making Paul’s suggestion a good one.
Godzilla, this is historical America. We leave our guard down until we get a bloody nose. Then we wake up with a fury.
Just hope we never wake up too late.
Read the VA motion-to-dismiss opinion. It lists the many ways this thing can be taken down.
“Neoliberals” went the same way as the “Straussians,” in that the power of the pejorative did not survive scrutiny outside of its champion conspiracy circle.
A section from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Recovery_Administration seems relevant:
“In 1935, in the court case of Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, the Supreme Court declared the NRA as unconstitutional because it attempted to regulate commerce that was not interstate in character, and that the codes represented an unacceptable delegation of power from the legislature to the executive. Also in the 1930s, the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) suffered a similar fate, as it too was declared unconstitutional.[1] Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes wrote for a unanimous Court in invalidating the industrial “codes of fair competition” which the NIRA enabled the President to issue. The Court held that the codes violated the United States Constitution’s separation of powers as an impermissible delegation of legislative power to the executive branch. The Court also held that the NIRA provisions were in excess of congressional power under the Commerce Clause.”
Here’s hoping these precedents are upheld.