In the early 16th century, Hernan Cortes and his army of conquistadors were prepping themselves to invade, and ultimately conquer the Aztec empire. As the soldiers prepared for battle, their ships sat anchored off the coast of what is now Veracruz, in plain sight of his anxious troops.
If all else failed, they thought, they could make a quick getaway to the ships and sail to safety. Cortes realized that some in his crew where getting uneasy, and ordered that the ships be scuttled. Knowing that they would be faced with only two options—fight to survive, or die.
On Thursday, Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the majority opinion to uphold Obamacare, writing that the individual mandate is equivalent to a tax, and therefore, constitutional.
For months prior to the ruling, as Mitt Romney made his way through the GOP primaries, the debate over both Obamacare and Romneycare loomed as a political sticking point for his campaign (and for the Obama campaign as well).
As the case against the law made its way through the federal courts, speculation built that it would head to the supremes and the belief that the court would strike down the individual mandate, and thus, the entire mess of it, grew stronger.
Personally, I felt that if the court struck down the law, it wouldn’t be the dominant issue that Romney had to deal with during the campaign. I’m sure this suited most conservative s and Republicans just fine.
I didn’t see how Romney could honestly make a case against Obamacare after his Romneycare experiment in Massachusetts. Making this argument eventually would end up doing more harm than good for Romney.
But John Roberts scuttled our ship. With the stroke of a pen, the lines in our political battle were redrawn.
The campaign is now about (or should be about) those who want to repeal Obamacare in its entirety, and those who want to embrace and keep this monstrosity of a law, along with its onerous regulations, bureaucracy and a price tag of over $1 trillion.
This makes things interesting for Democrats this election season. Democrats now have to make the case for defending Obamacare and embrace this law during their town halls and campaign stops this summer and fall. All this with high unemployment, an anemic economy and a toxic President. Good luck with that, Democrats.
If this is going to be an honest debate, I encourage the Democrats defend all aspects of the law. But of course, they’d rather talk about the long list of Obamacare ‘benefits’, and not about the reality of its costs. And certainly not the fact that Obamacare is about more government control and numerous new taxes, taxes that eventually will be paid for by the majority of taxpaying Americans, which is to say, the middle class. In fact, despite the court’s ruling, the White House is already trying to twist the truth.
As for Republicans and conservatives, I agree with Paul Ryan. This is our last chance. Democrats have their hands full, but as a party the GOP have to have the right conditions–the White House, a majority in the Senate, and build on gains in the House. On top of that, the Republicans need leadership with intestinal fortitude to make the right decisions when all of that is obtained. Remember, repealing Obamacare was a priority of the 2010 campaign also.
Repealing Obamacare means catching lightning in a bottle and it needs to happen within the next year. If all the conditions are met, there should be no reason why it can’t happen over the next twelve months. I for one, don’t trust politicians enough to play a waiting game. The repeal process is like cement, the longer we wait, the harder it is to remove. Just like the conquistadors, there is no turning back. The America we know is at stake.
And when can I start volunteering for him?
A generic Republican candidate now holds a four-point lead over President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election matchup. It’s a fifth week in a row that the GOP candidate has been ahead and the widest gap between the candidates to date.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds a generic Republican candidate earns support from 46% of Likely U.S. Voters, while the president picks up 42% of the vote. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and nine percent (9%) are undecided.Last week, the Republican held a 45% to 43% advantage.
Forget T-Paw vs Mittens, or Cain vs whoever. Looks like the fireworks in the GOP 2012 fight are between
Rollins Bachmann and Palin:
Michele Bachmann’s new top consultant, Ed Rollins, began his tenure with scathing criticism of potential Bachmann rival Sarah Palin.
“Sarah has not been serious over the last couple of years,” Rollins told Brian Kilmeade on his radio show, Kilmeade and Friends. “She got the Vice Presidential thing handed to her, she didn’t go to work in the sense of trying to gain more substance, she gave up her governorship.”
I understand that this is what campaign consultants do, and Ed Rollins is all about Ed Rollins more than Michelle Bachmann. But but can anyone really disagree with his criticisms of Palin here? Palin fell out of favor with me after she resigned as governor of Alaska. She built some decent political capital, had a decent approval rating, etc. And not for nothing, but she has done a disservice to herself over the past few years and her ugly poll numbers will be tough to overcome.
UPDATE. The story gets a bit more interesting.
It’s barely Tuesday and it’s already the worst week ever for the Gingrich campaign. Will Gingrich flame out before the campaign is even a week old?
[South Carolina Governor Nikki] Haley, whose promise to endorse a presidential candidate has made her a key power broker in the Republican primary fight, joined in the chorus Tuesday and said she is “terribly disappointed” in Gingrich.
“What he said was absolutely unfortunate,” Haley told CNN in a phone interview. “Here you’ve got Representative Ryan trying to bring common sense to this world of insanity, and Newt absolutely cut him off at the knees.”
“When you have a conservative fighting for real change, the last thing we need is a presidential candidate cutting him off at the knees,” she added.
It’s easy to figure out Newt’s Road to the White House from here. Let’s see now:
1) Piss off Iowa Republicans? Check
2) Piss off South Carolina Republicans? Check
4) President Gingrich!
A sincere hat-tip goes to Governor Haley, especially for the last sentence in that excerpt. Paul Ryan has done what most politicians would never dare to do–formulate and actually present a plan to reform our disastrous entitlement programs. The President, the Democrats in Congress–not one of them is proposing anything. And certainly not Newt Gingrich. He’d rather
see what the polls are saying and play to the elderly vote “have a conversation” about entitlement reform. That’s not leadership, Mr. Speaker. That’s more of the same crap. Which is what we don’t need nor want.
Call it ignorance or call it brazen. Either way, you have to call it dumb. Haley Barbour makes his case for his potential candidacy:
But let me just make this very plain. I’m a lobbyist, a politician, and a lawyer. You know, that the trifecta. And I am willing to have my record in front of everybody.
Meanwhile, as a lobbyist, he and his firm pushed for amnesty:
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour made the case Sunday on Fox News that his career as a high-powered federal lobbyist for domestic corporations and foreign governments would be an asset if he ran for President in 2012.
Barbour may be eager to showcase his record, but one of Barbour’s foreign lobbying clients could cause him some troubles in the 2012 Republican primary, if he decides to run. According to a State Department filing by Barbour’s former lobbying firm, The Embassy of Mexico decided to retain Barbour’s services on August 15, 2001, to work on, among other things, legislation that would provide a path to citizenship for foreigners living illegally in the United States—what opponents of immigration reform call “amnesty.”
So there you have it. Barbour’s literally sold out on behalf of shamnesty, while admitting that he’s a bona fide lobbyist/politician. Meanwhile he’s trying to win the hearts of conservatives and Republican voters, in the middle of a Tea Party revolt that is shunning career politicians. And he’s also an older, white and portly Mississippi native with a deep Southern accent.
Good luck with that.
UPDATE. Behold a Memeorandum thread!
UPDATE. Robert Stacy McCain on Barbour’s previous endeavors:
That will go over real good with GOP primary voters in Iowa, I’m sure.
This is an actual story at Politico. When the pundits scratch their heads as to why Congressional approval ratings are at all-time lows, its partially due to things like this:
Momentum is building to mix the traditionally partisan seating arrangements at the State of the Union later this month, even though there’s no clear plan for how to actually make that happen.
Several Senate Republicans have signed on to the effort, along with a few key House leaders, who have endorsed Democratic Sen. Mark Udall’s proposal to head across the aisle – literally – and sit with members of the opposite party during the annual address on Jan. 25.
All told, more than two dozen members of Congress have publicly endorsed the idea.
Congressional seating is open at the State of the Union on a first-come basis, so anyone can sit anywhere — outside of the first few rows reserved for cabinet officials, Supreme Court justices and certain congressional leaders.
The real test will come the evening of the address, when members will choose to sit with their parties or mix it up. But at least on paper, Udall’s request for a “symbolic gesture of unity” is gaining support.
Unemployment is over 9%. Economic growth is anemic, and the housing market is in a double-dip. But Americans should be comforted in the fact that our elected overlords are making progress on Congressional comity and seating arrangements all in the name of bogus “unity”.
The alternate title for this post is “Glutton for punishment attempts another flushing of donors’ contributions down the toilet.”
Sources close to former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani confirm to CBS News that the Republican is talking to his political advisers about mounting another presidential bid.
Giuliani, whose 2008 presidential campaign fell flat, has learned from his mistakes, a source says, and will retool his strategy, beginning with a strong start in the early primary state of New Hampshire.
The New York Post first reported on Giuliani’s moves Friday morning. According to the Post, Giuliani is optimistic about his chances, predicting a Republican primary populated with far-right candidates like Sarah Palin. That would allow him to stand out as a moderate candidate with strong national security credentials. The Post reports Giuliani will meet with voters in New Hampshire next month.
I’d like to know who these “political advisers” are and, if I ever run for President, immediately burn their business cards.
Seriously, is he really considering this? In the wake of an election that saw conservatives all over the country organize and assert themselves as the driving force in the party, one which propelled Republicans into majority status in the House, Giuliani really wants to paint himself as a moderate savior for the GOP? Really??
[Hat Tip: Memeorandum]