Have Conservatives Won the Debate, even after losing the Battle?

By now, you likely have heard that the Supreme Court has upheld the individual mandate part of Obamacare.  Like me, your initial reaction was likely one of disappointment.  However, after reading the ruling, you may have also found a silver lining in this ruling that gets down to the very heart of why the mandate was such a scary thing; governmental overreach.

In the majority opinion written by Chief Justices Roberts:

“The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause,” and “That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it.”

The majority also said that the Necessary and Proper Clause also did not warrant upholding the individual mandate.

“Even if the individual mandate is necessary to the Act’s insurance reforms,” and Roberts added that, “such an expansion of federal power is not a proper means for making those reforms effective.”

This is the first time since the New Deal that the Supreme Court invalidated a law because it attempted to force states into an action by using its spending powers.

George Will wrote this today “Conservatives won a substantial victory on Thursday.”

How can this be, Obamacare was found to be constitutional?

The answer is because it was found constitutional under Congresses power to tax.  Obamacare does not mandate you to buy health insurance; it only taxes you if you choose not to.

According to Will, “The case challenged the court to fashion a judicially administrable principle that limits Congress' power to act on the mere pretense of regulating interstate commerce.  At least Roberts got the court to embrace emphatic language rejecting the Commerce Clause rationale for penalizing the inactivity of not buying insurance.”

Here is the majority’s opinion on this:

"The power to regulate commerce presupposes the existence of commercial activity to be regulated. ...  The individual mandate, however, does not regulate existing commercial activity.  It instead compels individuals to become active in commerce by purchasing a product, on the ground that their failure to do so affects interstate commerce. Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. ...  Allowing Congress to justify federal regulation by pointing to the effect of inaction on commerce would bring countless decisions an individual could potentially make within the scope of federal regulation, and – under the government's theory – empower Congress to make those decisions for him."

Sean Trende summed this up when he said “But judicial conservatives who are not just concerned about the outcome got more than they could have reasonably hoped for.  Doctrinally speaking, this case will likely be remembered as a watershed decision for conservatives.”

“Five justices just signaled to lower courts that, but for the unique taxation power argument, they were prepared to rule that a major act of Congress that plainly touched upon economic activity exceeded Congress’ commerce powers. Right now, liberals are seemingly too busy celebrating their win, and conservatives bemoaning their loss, to realize the significance of this.”

This ruling did not give conservatives the short-term victory that they were looking for, however, for the long term; this could mean huge victories down the road. Roberts had decided to put the courts legacy ahead of his personal feelings about the wisdom of the law.

Romney should be Thankful that Perry & Gingrich took the Sting out of Bain

In the Republican primaries, Mitt Romney's opponents attempted to take him down a notch by throwing around the words vulture capitalist, or something along those lines.  Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich both attacked Romney for his venture capitalist ties.  The conservative media, or should I say the Republican media went nuts.  However, who could blame them.  Team Romney had already dug up everything they could possible think of to attempt to take these two out of contention.  Team Romney was not at all merciful when dealing with those who came close to taking over as the front runner. Without Romney's backers in the press, who knows if he would have been able to withstand the attacks?

Could it be that Perry and Gingrich actually helped Romney by using the same attack that was sure to come from team Obama if Romney had become the nominee?  Team Obama had not waited very long to come out and use the Bain attack against Romney, likely an attempt to take him out early.  So far, there are no signs that the attacks on Romney's time at Bain have done any real damage.  Romney has been a formidable challenger to the president, and Obama has already used the best line of attack that he will likely have against Romney.  The attacks on Bain had already been use though, and that could have contributed to the fact that they seem to have had little effect on the campaign.  

There is no way to tell if the Bain attacks have not worked because people have already heard them, or because the public has decided to tune them out.  Many Democrats came out against making these attacks, and that could have contributed to them not having the desired sting.  Either way, one thing is for sure, these attacks did not work when they were used by Republicans, and they have yet to work this cycle when used by Democrats. It is not that hard to believe that this could have something to do with the fact that the press had already admonished two candidates for using them already.  

Journalistic Standards, and MSNBC

Why do conservatives act surprised when MSNBC does something that would seem to violate journalistic standards?  Honestly, are there really ethics in journalism?

I do not claim there are not great journalist out there, in fact, there are many who still conduct themselves in a way that would be considered ethical.  However, you will not find these journalists working for MSNBC.

There is little doubt that Andrea Mitchell is an intelligent woman, and whether she knew ahead of time that the editing team gave her a selectively edited tape of Mitt Romney talking about being “amazed” by WaWa’s touch-screen sandwich maker.  If she did, then that is her bad, as well as the News Stations.  It came out shortly that the whole thing was not Romney’s “supermarket scanner moment.”  All Romney was doing is saying that he was amazed by the contrast between private sector innovation and public sector bureaucracy, and that the touch-screen sandwich maker is a perfect example of this.

Will Voters Listen to Bill Clinton and Vote Obama Out?

The above video is all over the Internet. In fact, I would not be offended if you have seen this enough – seen it ad nauseam – and just click to the next blog, or a new site.  However, the content is too rich, and must be covered.

Bill Clinton said “And [Republicans] say [Democrats] had 21 months, put us back in.  The Democrats are saying something like this: Look, we found a big hole that we did not dig, and we didn’t get out of it in 21 months, but at least we quit digging.  So, don’t go back in reverse, give us two more years and if it doesn’t work you have another election in just two years, you can vote us all out then. But for goodness sakes, we quit digging, don’t bring back the shovel brigade.”

One has to wonder, has the former president been working on telling the truth the last decade.  It is true that the president has now had the full four years Clinton asked the country to give him, and the Democrats.  The Senate has not passed a budget in so long; the new normal is to run the country without a budget.  For all the cadences that candidate Obama comes equipped with, nothing is going to help him hide the fact that the country is not moving in the right direction.  For all the blame the president wants to levy, nothing is going to convince the voters that the country is not moving in the right direction.  Obama loves to talk about how conservative principles – who is hid under the guise of Republican economic thought – had left the country in “the ditch.”   He is completely ignoring the fact that the housing crisis started in the 1990’s.  This is when many of the rules that allowed the risky loans to be made.

Can the Debates Decide the Election?

Reagan did this better than anybody I've ever seen, or heard. When I think of great debate moments, this is what I think of.  I simply cannot wait to see Obama and Romney debate, because they are so much alike in the sense they get frustrated when called out, but have a good grasp on policy. 


So far this years presidential race has been very close, with one of the candidates out front by a few percentage points, well within the margin of error.  Because it is such a close race, this could heighten the importance of good debate performances.  Conservatives resoundingly feel that John McCain had his butt handed to him by Obama in 2008.  However, in 2008, everyone was talking about what McCain cannot say.

The Constitutional Scholar President is going back to School [of the Supreme Court]

June has not been a great month so far for Democrats, and President Obama. The attempt to recall Gov. Walker in Wisconsin failed, miserably.  Last week the unemployment rate went up, again!  Nevertheless, there is a chance this gets worse.

The Supreme Court should decide whether the presidents “historic achievement” – health care law – is constitutional.  The Court will also decide whether the Obama administration has a right to challenge Arizona’s tough new immigration law.

The big fish is the health care law, and if the court strikes down all or part of the law – the mandate would constitute part of the law – then it would be a huge blow to the Obama administration’s argument that Republicans are only against the law because they are against the president. These are not the only laws that have been challenged; the Obama administration has lost in the courts throughout this term on what has to be an alarming rate for the White House.

Ilya Shapiro wrote about this for the Wall Street Journal:

This term alone,the high court has ruled unanimously against the government on religious liberty, criminal procedure and property rights.  When the administration can't get even a single one of the liberal justices to agree with it in these unrelated areas of the law, that's a sign there's something wrong with its constitutional vision.

Shapiro points out that the White House has lost many cases in this term. 

If the Tea Party is the Goose, then the Anti-Walker Protesters should be the Gander

Lets first acknowledge that this is only one person in the state of Wisconsin. Then lets acknowledge if this was made by Bill Maher, this video would be used to show how violent conservatives are, and how willing we are to go to extremes to win our battles. Of course this is nonsense, because the so-called extreme elements of the conservative movement is not out there throwing glitter on people, or in the case of the guy above video, who has threatened Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch. Read on for the transcript of the interview and the premise of this post. 

Romney Can Win by Doing Nothing but Pointing at the Economy

The longer the Obama campaign attempts to keep Bain in the news, the better it is for Romney. I know, this sounds like it is kind of backwards, but because of  the likes of Bill Clinton, who said "I don’t think we ought to get into the position where we say this is bad work; this is good work,” when discussing Bain and Romney. He also said that "There’s no question that, in terms of getting up, going to the office, and basically performing the essential functions of the office, a man who’s been governor and had a sterling business career crosses the qualification threshold.” 

Again, because of the steady stream of Democrats, attempting to have it both ways, the worse this is for Obama, and the better it is for Romney.  The effect that this has is to help keep the issue in the news for Romney, who wants to use it to say he has the economic intuition to bring this country out of the rut. 

Normally the attacks would be potent, but when so many Democrats come out and say that these attacks are wrongheaded, and in the case of Clinton, going as far as to say Romney is qualified, then it starts to make the Obama campaign look desperate. 

Now only that, Amie Parnes and Mike Lillis over at the Hill.com got it right when they wrote "A number of Democrats have voiced concerns with Obama’s strategy, warning that voters could view the attacks as a broad condemnation of private equity firms rather than a focused rebuke of Romney's management style – an interpretation that could reinforce perceptions, encouraged by Republicans, that Obama is anti-free market."

Will Latest Economic News Accelerate the Negative Campaigning from the President?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

After an unexpected slowdown in hiring last month, economic news will make reelection even more difficult for President Obama. Although former NBA All-Star Charles Barkley seems convinced that Mitt Romney does not have a chance, the economic mood in the country is going to make reelection that much more difficult for a president that is already hovering in the high 40’s in job approval ratings. 


The “grim” job numbers sunk markets; however, does that mean it will sink the presidents reelecting chances.


President Obama and his team in Chicago have already gone after Romney hard. His record at Bain capital was first. Which has caused a backlash with many prominent Democrats, coming out harshly against the tactic.


Bill Clinton told Harvey Weinstein - whom is a top Obama fundraiser – that Romney had a good business career, and that “There's no question that in terms of getting up and going to the office and, you know, basically performing the essential functions of the office, the man who has been governor and had a sterling business career crosses the qualification threshold." 


That is a glowing endorsement for the Romney candidacy, coming from Democrat Bill Clinton. One has to wonder if Clinton doesn't want to see Obama lose.   


Clinton was not the only Democrat to criticize team Obama’s Bain attacks. Newark Mayor Cory Booker also said he was "uncomfortable" with the Obama campaign's Bain attacks. Overall, the Bain attacks have not hit the mark. Now that there is a worsening economic situation going on, what will team Obama come out with next? Obama's campaign team has begun to go after Romney’s time as Governor of Massachusetts. Even this is going to be a weak attack considering the president lacks economic good news to run on.