Total retreat. After reading today’s article at the NYTimes on healthcare and the possibility that the Supreme Court might strike down the mandate portion of the bill, you’d think the Democrats were never for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The supreme court hasn’t yet decided the fate of Obamacare, but the words “spoiled-sport” can’t help but come to mind here. A potential clear defeat for the Democrats and this administration concerning one of their chief accomplishments, and it seems now that they are sluffing off the idea that they were ever even for the bill!
The article in the Times today states that if the court strikes down the mandate ” it will have unraveled a legislative compromise that many liberals had viewed with suspicion from the beginning.” In other words, the writer wants us to believe that Democrats were never for the bill they passed. Try also not to laugh too much at the word “compromise” in that sentence, considering this was not at all a bi-partisans bill. I know it’s hard, but try. It goes on to say that “Mr. Obama was a late convert to the merits of the individual mandate”. So, apparently, liberals were never for the bill they passed, and Obama wasn’t really for the mandate he signed into law. Funny, I seem to remember Democrats rejoicing at the laws passage.
One thing is clear: at no point were a majority of Americans for Obamacare as it was presented. Polls show this, and the Democrats know it. But now that that is true AND it looks like the Supreme Court might agree with a majority of the American people, the Democrats are trying to distance themselves from it. Good luck to them on that one.
The article goes on to explain how this really is great news for Progressives! Great news, since of course they all want government run, single-payer healthcare anyway. Now, they can re-litigate the issue and do it right this time! Hurray! Yawn. You really have to read the article to see why the words “spoiled-sport” are the most accurate words to describe liberals who wrote this article, despite the slightly juvenille connotations that are attached to that phrase…it actually fits quite well here.
If this mandate falls, it will be a great day for freedom. After all, if the federal government can take the commerce clause of the constitution and apply it in such a liberal manner as to make people buy a product and claim if they don’t buy a product that it affects commerce, it almost wholly destroys any and all limitations put on the federal government by the constitution. It would set a new precedent if left unchecked, and expand federal powers to new heights. I only hope the court does the right thing and gives the progressives good reason to be pissed off…not that they were ever for the bill they signed into law and over which they all rejoiced.