America Today

2012 March 28
by justrand

Gettysburg wasn’t the only battle of the Civil War, but it is considered to be the most pivotal.

The Supreme Court battle over ObamaCare isn’t the only battle in the fight for America’s future…but it may indeed be the most pivotal.

How did we get out on this tightrope, where the opinion of ONE man, Anthony Kennedy, will decide whether we have a chance to retain our freedoms…or we are forced to surrender them one at a time to a voracious and sprawling central government.

For that is EXACTLY what is at stake.

The TWO (and they only offered two) arguments from the Obama Regime offered up to the Supremes to support ObamaCare were these:

1. Health Insurance is waaaaay different than any other product…and we would never EVER try to force anyone to buy anything else (although, ahem, this would give us the power to do so)

2. If everyone was FORCED to buy it, then the cost of it would go down

In re. #1….puhleeze! Granting the government the POWER to compel Americans to buy anything THEY deem as “necessary”, and then trusting them to NEVER use that power again??? This argument is laughable…yet this is exactly what Vermicelli (or whatever his name is) argued on March 27.

In re. #2…it’s sooooo expensive because not everyone buys it! So if everyone HAD to buy it, then the cost would go down. Same things goes for the Chevy Volt…right? Uh oh…

As with the Civil War, there will be many more battles even if we win this one. But as with Gettysburg, once the South lost that battle, the end was inevitable. If we lose this battle, and the government is granted ultimate power over all our decisions (even though they, like, PROMISE not to use it…unless it’s like REALLY REALLY necessary) then the end is inevitable.

One man now holds the fate of our nation in his hands.

How the hell did we get out on this tightrope anyway?

82 Responses leave one →
  1. 2012 March 28 7:09 am
    bc3b permalink

    JR –

    You’re right on it all boils down to Kennedy. Ronald Reagan did some really great things as President, but he had some really crappy judgement when it came to Supreme Court judges. Let’s just be thankful the decision is up to Kennedy and not Sandra Day O’Connor.

  2. 2012 March 28 7:22 am
    drdog09 permalink

    One man now holds the fate of our nation in his hands.

    True but we have almost from our inception has one man or another holding our nation in their hands. Do we really think that we would even have a nation if there were not a George Washington? His countrymen must have thought so as he assumed the position of President by near acclimation as no one wished to oppose him in an election. None since have had that opportunity. Or how about Lee. No man could have assumed the leadership of the Army of Northern Virginia but he. He lost in the end but the CSA would not have lasted long without him. That Kennedy stands there on the rope does not surprise me.

    What surprises me is how narrow the inquiry has been in the orals yesterday. Individual Mandate is not the only issue at odds here. Only Scalia brought up the enumerated powers bounds and the expansive nature of the 10th Amendment to deter Federal power.

    As you say there will be no bounds. All the government will have to do is create a market in an item them deem it necessary and proper to regulate it. And dare I say it, substitute government with industry group and that is where the emphasis will come to regulate the market. It always play out that way. Regulatory capture is a fantastic way to destroy your competitors and new entrants in said market.

    They only way out is to become Amish….

  3. 2012 March 28 7:23 am
    drdog09 permalink

    Amen to that BC! O’Connor would have bled crocodile tears to get ACA constitutional.

  4. 2012 March 28 7:47 am
    justrand permalink

    drdog: “All the government will have to do is create a market in an item them deem it necessary and proper to regulate it. “

    And then REQUIRE it…and then determine what you have to buy to MEET the requirement.

    There will NO boundary…except, of course, that the government will promise to never EVER use the loaded gun they will have been handed. Whew!

  5. 2012 March 28 7:47 am
    bc3b permalink

    I cannot believe how careless GOP presidents have been in nominating SC Justices (going back to Eisenhower): Eisenhower (Warren and Brennan), Nixon (Blackmum), Ford (Stevens), Reagan (O’Connor and Kennedy), Bush41 (Souter). Had it not been for wiser minds talking him out of it, Bush43’s selections might have been Gonzales and Miers.

    Supreme Court Justices usually outlast the Presidents that nominate them; Stevens outlasted Ford by more than 30 years.

  6. 2012 March 28 7:47 am
    JustMary permalink

    One man now holds the fate of our nation in his hands.

    Ah, but God is not a man that He should lie, and God is bigger than this man. I think all of this is a Kabuki. There will be a manner of control, no matter what happens with the mandate. The times we are in right now tell us that. Anyone can see the lawlessness abounding…love has most certainly grown cold. When a douchebag like Spike Lee can intentionally put an elderly couple in harm’s way in an act of vengeance? To a mega audience- in seconds? We’re doomed as society. If this is how they react to false information about the death of a thug, how will they react to Obama’s election loss, or to the loss of Obamacare? I apologize, I have been Queen Pessimist about all of this lately.

  7. 2012 March 28 8:17 am
    drdog09 permalink


    I think you are right but the order should be reversed.

    Lets take jet engines. They are already in regulatory capture vis a vis the FAA for type certification. Otherwise they have world wide competition as everyone has to meet type certification. But lets say Pratt Whitney and GE wanted to corner the market in turbofans.

    They would first determine what they want to sell (ie you are forced to buy) as a REQUIREMENT. They would then have their K Street minions work over the legislation necessary to define the MARKET that needs regulation. Then K Street would go to somebody like Lugar or Cornyn to advance the legislation to define the NECESSITY for the regulation. In the case of jet engines they would probably make a pitch for safety.

    That way the US mfrs could freeze out the likes of Rolls-Royce on bidding.

  8. 2012 March 28 8:32 am
    justrand permalink

    drdog, they could indeed apply it to things like jet engines…but that’s not (IMHO) where the danger lies. Sure, they could “reward” GE that way…but you and I don’t buy jet engines.

    Let’s go back to healthcare…since if Kennedy votes with the Fascist Wing of the court (Ginsbug, et al) that is where the first fissures in our Republic will be exploited.

    VERY SIMPLE and likely scenario:
    – It is deemed NECESSARY that all medical records be electronic, and directly tied to each individual…for the good of all, and to reduce expenses
    – A simple chip becomes available (is very close now), with your always up-to-date medical records/history that can be painlessly inserted into each individual at any time…including birth
    – For the GOOD or all and to REDUCE the expense…EVERYONE must have the chip inserted in order to legally receive ANY medical care or purchase ANY medical product or prescription

    Ta da!

  9. 2012 March 28 8:42 am

    It is deemed NECESSARY that all medical records be electronic, and directly tied to each individual…for the good of all, and to reduce expenses~~~JR

    I beleive that is already in the bill, with federal access to the info.

  10. 2012 March 28 9:23 am
    justrand permalink

    good point, IP…in that case the “means” of storage and access is all they would need to deem “Necessary”. And that “means” will be electronic ID/data stored ON the person.

    This is a no-brainer for them. And they will simply make it ILLEGAL for any medical services to be dispense without such ID. I can even see them using this as a lever to legalize all illegal immigrants!

  11. 2012 March 28 9:27 am
    justrand permalink

    btw, THIS is the “limiting principle” the Left is using today to say that Health Care is “unique…and thus the government can’t abuse its new power:
    The government can penalize inaction only when that inaction deprives everyone else of a public good.

    Which fits PRECISELY into my “chip under the skin” argument.

    If MY refusal to get the chip inserted means that it will cost extra to provide service to ME…then I am driving up the cost to everyone else…and depriving them of a PUBLIC GOOD!


  12. 2012 March 28 9:34 am
    drdog09 permalink

    btw, THIS is the “limiting principle” the Left is using today to say that Health Care is “unique…and thus the government can’t abuse its new power:

    Ha! That’s not the definition of the concept of limiting power if that is the way the Libs define it. Unique is not the defining limit. Heck I could say that jet engines are a `unique` market because they don’t compete against piston engines. Using that metric, it turns the idea of enumerated powers into a series of JD Powers categories. Sigh…

  13. 2012 March 28 9:37 am

    we can only hope

    But the court’s conservatives said the law was passed as a package and must fall as a package

  14. 2012 March 28 9:43 am
    drdog09 permalink

    If I can believe LAT that Kennedy is onboard for all or nothing then he has probably made up his mind for or against the act. Probably against. If its a package deal I bet none of the libs split off which would mean we have a 5-4 decision.

  15. 2012 March 28 9:45 am

    If it happens, I would expect a sharp bump up in the market.

  16. 2012 March 28 9:47 am
    justrand permalink

    i just the morning’s transcripts…and then some opinions at various sites…and here is the outrageous bullshit being pushed:

    Congress is so screwed up they won’t be able to fix it, or do a new one, and yet there’s at least SOME good in there…so let’s leave the whole thing!

    I kid you not. THAT is how folks are reading the morning’s session…and they may be right in that reading.

    Yup, the Left is relying on having written such a convoluted piece of shit…that the Supremes will leave it alone because NO ONE can understand it!

    Weep for America

  17. 2012 March 28 9:58 am

    The whole cluster foxtrot could be thrown out based on it’s constitutional vagueness alone.

  18. 2012 March 28 9:59 am

    If this total rejection comes to pass, it will
    be like watching fireworks as MSM heads explode.
    Ahhhh, the sight of splody heads in the morning.

  19. 2012 March 28 10:08 am
    bc3b permalink

    Newt Supporter Hosts Dinner Featuring Romney Supporters:

  20. 2012 March 28 10:29 am
    drdog09 permalink

    Scalia notes that should the Court do a pick of the litter on the bill it might run foul of the 8th Amendment.

    Here’s another angle. The bill is 2700 pages long. If the court reviewed 10 pages a day to salvage what’s left of the bill should the mandate be tossed they will miss thier June opinion date. So the Court rather than let it all stand, toss it all out and suggest Congress start over.

    An another. If the Court agrees in the main that individual mandate is toast then the whole interstate commerce gambit is gone. So there goes precedent as a basis for a ruling. The Roberts court would be on fresh ground. If that is the case then there will be a greater propensity for the majority to get it right on the strike.

  21. 2012 March 28 11:23 am
    RepublicanPundit permalink


  22. 2012 March 28 11:27 am
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    …If they can’t defend the COTUS, Then they are nothing more than the SCROTUS!!!

  23. 2012 March 28 12:25 pm
    justrand permalink

    well said, RP!! 🙂

    btw…on several Leftist blogs I saw this: “ObamaCare was passed by the Congress and was therefore the will of the people!” Well…it WAS “passed” by the Congress…with NO Bi-Partisan support, and even then it BARELY passed using every arcane trick in the book. Thus it DID NOT and DOES NOT represent the “will of the people”.

  24. 2012 March 28 12:49 pm
    RepublicanPundit permalink

  25. 2012 March 28 1:13 pm
    Wylie E. Coyote permalink

    #24 This is the freakin’ problem in a nutshell: mindless adherence to the rule of the mob (aka so-called “democracy”)

    I dont give a freak how “popular” something is – your God-given rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness (ie property) CANNOT be negated by meer Mob-rule or a one-time vote of Congress or 50.1% of the people~!

    Its scary that people think that you can do whatever you please to anyone else in the world provide you win (once) an election…..

    So wheither or not CrappyCare (Obamacare) was or was not popular is totally irrelevant to the fundamental question of do we acknowledge or respect individual right or not

    The question is a Moral one…..and I say you are morally bankrupt if you think you can trample on people’s rights simply because something is “popular”

  26. 2012 March 28 1:13 pm
    Wylie E. Coyote permalink

    “But one can acknowledge Congress’ acknowledged power to involve itself in health care without granting it the power to punish the mere act of existing: in this case, a person who literally sits around doing nothing would become a criminal, by virtue of his failure to comply with the mandate to purchase a product. No longer would one even have to do anything to violate Congress’ orders. Mitch McConnell’s point is far more serious than Cohen makes it out to be: what, precisely, are the limitations on Congress’ powers under the Commerce Clause, if this law is upheld? Are there any at all?

    The fight over Obamacare is the fight over some of the last remnants of acknowledged Constitutional restraint on Congress’ power to regulate economics. Do we still have hope as a republic, or are we destined to descend into oligarchy? We look now to the Court to protect one of our remaining individual rights. We will learn soon whether checks and balances still exist, or whether each branch exists as little more than a rubber-stamp for the will of the others.”

  27. 2012 March 28 1:14 pm

    let them keep talking

  28. 2012 March 28 1:16 pm
    JustMary permalink

    Thank you, Dr. Pepper

  29. 2012 March 28 1:31 pm

    The framers jumped the shark big time when they put in the
    interstate commerce clause.We need a do over.

  30. 2012 March 28 1:41 pm
    MI Conservative permalink

    I’d love to go to a bar and have a beer with Scalia!

  31. 2012 March 28 1:43 pm
    Wylie E. Coyote permalink

    “Feldman will recognize this process as — you guessed it — adverse selection caused by asymmetric information. Which, under his limiting principle, means that Congress can swoop down and mandate that Americans purchase broccoli insurance. After all, those people choosing not to buy broccoli are “ depriving everyone of [what Feldman calls] a public good.” In sum, Feldman’s limiting principle would allow Congress to force all Americans to buy broccoli. Which is to say, it’s not a limiting principle at all.

    Like every other so-called limiting principle offered by ObamaCare’s defenders, Feldman’s has no basis in the Constitution or any other law.

    It is a post hoc rationalization, made by people who are shocked to find themselves before the Supreme Court, defending the constitutionality of their desire to bully others into submission.”

  32. 2012 March 28 2:10 pm
    MI Conservative permalink

    I posted about Scalia and a beer about 30 minutes ago. A hockey player just text me asking if I want to go to a Detroit Tiger game this summer and get $hitfaced? Hey bc should I see if he has an extra ticket for you?

  33. 2012 March 28 2:13 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    There seem to be but three ways for a nation to acquire wealth. The first is by war… This is robbery. The second by commerce, which is generally cheating. The third by agriculture, the only honest way, wherein man receives a real increase of the seed thrown into the ground, in a kind of continual miracle, wrought by the hand of God in his favour, as a reward for his innocent life and his virtuous industry

    — Ben Franklin

  34. 2012 March 28 2:24 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    WEC, 32,

    Canon has it half right. He’s on the money about the legality of it all. He’s off on the politicio-economic aspects. He assume that broccoli eaters will gain via lower prices while broccoli shunners will be raped for paying for something they don’t want. In fact in a regulatory game neither party will be satisfied. When the broccoli board is created, and Congress would create one, for you can regulate without one, the costs of that board will be borne by the producers of broccoli. Those costs will be added to the wholesale price in the food chain. Additional inspection and control in the retail channel will be instituted as well. This will add costs to the grocer who will pass those on. So in the end, the broccoli eater will see the costs rise regardless and the broccoli shunner will be aghast at the penalty fee he must endure for not eating his share.

    Oh and worse yet, if the regulatory burden becomes too much for the grower or grocer the product will disappear from the shelves altogether. Then Congress won’t blame the regulator. No, they will institude price support controls to manipulate the market for additional broccoli. The cost of course born by the entire populace. We have seen this all before with wheat, fruits, sugar, et. al.


  35. 2012 March 28 2:25 pm
    MI Conservative permalink

    The third by agriculture, the only honest way, wherein man receives a real increase of the seed thrown into the ground, in a kind of continual miracle, wrought by the hand of God in his favour, as a reward for his innocent life and his virtuous industry B. Franklin

    drdog, Sounds like farming is a lot like sex. HAHAHA

  36. 2012 March 28 2:29 pm
    justrand permalink

    MIC…I guess it depends upon the definition of “planting your seed”

  37. 2012 March 28 2:34 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    Well you know ole Ben was a bit of a phliander… 🙂

  38. 2012 March 28 2:38 pm
    MI Conservative permalink

    Well you know ole Ben was a bit of a phliander

    hey, I was a Fly handler once.

  39. 2012 March 28 2:51 pm

    “I’d love to go to a bar and have a beer with Scalia!”

    I’d love to go to a bar and have a beer with Romney!

  40. 2012 March 28 3:34 pm
    MI Conservative permalink

    I’d love to go to a bar and have a beer with Romney!

    Dang Eph, If you would have been reminding Mormons don’t drink the last two months you had a better chance of getting me support Dick Lugar for president than Romney.

  41. 2012 March 28 3:44 pm
    JustMary permalink

    A Jew and a Mormon walk into a bar….

  42. 2012 March 28 3:46 pm
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    I have listened to all the oral arguments, so my opinion is as good as any talking heads, who probably haven’t.

    This is my take. The three twits(or tw@ts) are eating shit right out of the pot, not even waiting for it to be served. Breyer is waiting to be served another plate, however, he has noticed that it smells like shit and appears to have now noticed that it tastes like shit. The other 5 knew it was shit to start with.

    6-3 decision on all three arguments against the government and for the defense (twenty six states).

    Game over.

  43. 2012 March 28 3:55 pm
    MI Conservative permalink

    amazing how Yahoo news and google news are downplaying the poor performance by Obama’s attorneys and want to mock the conservative justices.

  44. 2012 March 28 4:01 pm
    judyt2012 permalink

    Has anyone seen the statistics on how the percentage of the population that has medical expenses during the year that exceed a low dollar amount.

    Well this shows that 1/3rd of the people do not engage in the healthcare marketplace in any given year and that less than 5% of the population account for 50% of the medical expenses while 50% of the population account for less than 3%.

    Now if we want to apply the Obama Administration argument that because people may at one time or another participate in the healthcare marketplace therefore they should be required to buy health insurance, then I think we should also look at other things where people might participate at one time.

    Now over 50% of the population get divorced and around 5% of the population will never marry.

    Divorce is expensive. Many families experience significant financial setbacks.

    Some people stay married because it is too expensive to divorce.

    It is unfair and government should do something to make sure that divorce is available to everyone and that no family needs to experience a financial harm from divorce

    Therefore, I propose that everyone be required to put a divorce attorney on retainer. But it might be too difficult to retain a specific attorney so instead each divorce lawyer should just be part of a pool of government divorce attorneys and every person should be required to pay into the salary pool for these lawyers.


    Now the reverse can also be true that 95% of the population marries at some time or another. Now weddings can be very expensive. Families save for years, go in debt, and spend fortunes on weddings. But not everyone can afford a big wedding. In fact some people forgo having the big wedding with hundreds of guests, sit down dinners and party afterwards. Certainly most of us cannot afford to have the big celebrity weddings televised on television.

    Therefore everyone should be required to buy into the wedding pool every year of their life. It will not matter if you are already married or never plan to marry. We need to allocate the cost of weddings over the entire population.

  45. 2012 March 28 4:08 pm
    TLS permalink

    #43 LOL!

  46. 2012 March 28 4:11 pm
    justrand permalink

    Judy…that was very well reasoned…I hereby nominate you to be Solicitor General!

  47. 2012 March 28 4:19 pm
    judyt2012 permalink

    #28 — Okay Spike Lee can tweet the address of person who the NBPs have placed a million dollar bounty (doesn’t matter that the address is wrong) … and this is okay behavior, but

    exactly what the Sarah Palin PAC do? Use the same political graphics of sights onto Congressional districts?

  48. 2012 March 28 4:21 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    RP, 44, man I hope you are right. I originally thought 6-3 myself. But after today I think its a 5-4 with maybe Scalia or Thomas rendering for the majority setting the stage for even more trimming of the commerce power in the future.

  49. 2012 March 28 4:27 pm
    drdog09 permalink


    Tie it all together.

    Since 100% of the cause of divorce is marriage and a small percentage don’t marry they are causing the rates to be raised for those that do divorce. Consequently if by the age of 28 you have not been married you shall pay a $500 a year penalty for not doing so. By not participating in the marriage marketplace you are denying the divorce lawyer pool lower rates!!

  50. 2012 March 28 4:35 pm
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    My little General does not salute any more. I demand the rest of the population (Even those I have not screwed) fix it!!

  51. 2012 March 28 4:35 pm
    TLS permalink

    It is deemed NECESSARY that all medical records be electronic, and directly tied to each individual…for the good of all, and to reduce expenses~~~JR

    I beleive that is already in the bill, with federal access to the info. ~ IP

    Guess what else is in your medical record now? This year when I took my kids for a check up at the Pediatrician, they asked as part of the background info:

    Does your family have pets?
    Anyone smoke?
    Any firearms in the house?

  52. 2012 March 28 4:36 pm
    justrand permalink

    Read to the end of this article for the summations from today’s arguments…

    Obama’s team never even got on base!

  53. 2012 March 28 4:44 pm
    bc3b permalink

    MI Conservative –

    “Hey bc should I see if he has an extra ticket for you?”

    Why not?

    I thought you team was a Junior team. They shouldn’t be getting “sh!tfaced.” Careful though; the local head of the New Black Panther Party is talking about burning Detroit down if teh city is forced to have a financial manager.

  54. 2012 March 28 4:49 pm
    bc3b permalink

    Eph –

    I’d love to go to a bar and have a beer with Romney!

    Practicing Mormons don’t drink alcoholic beverages, but they do have multiple wives.

  55. 2012 March 28 4:50 pm
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    This is the last arrow in the quiver for liberals. No universal health care, no mandate to take control of any part of the government. They have shot their wad on Obamacare and either live (or, the most likely the outcome will cause them to die) by it.

    They lose all arguments by one ruling, which has been 80 years in the making. FDR’s house of cards will fall if SCOTUS rules against them.

  56. 2012 March 28 4:57 pm
    justrand permalink

    RP I agree their house of cards will fall…which is why I fear they won’t let it. Cornered rats…ya know?

  57. 2012 March 28 5:14 pm
    JustMary permalink

    #53 I remember you telling me that! Our kids have not been asked about firearms, but we have been asked about pets and smokers.

  58. 2012 March 28 5:17 pm
    JustMary permalink

    #56 Precisely why my Hubs isn’t a Mormon. He doesn’t need multiple women remembering everything he does wrong. Also…beer.

  59. 2012 March 28 5:36 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    He doesn’t need multiple women ….

    Better part of valor, but I’ll ask it anyway. You’re good enough to remember it all for him?? 🙂

  60. 2012 March 28 5:38 pm
    TLS permalink

    #60 Last time I was in I was given the authorization slip to have my kids medical info added to the statewide data base that can be viewed by interested parties such as schools. I declined.

  61. 2012 March 28 5:44 pm
    justrand permalink

    TLS, won’t it be great when the answer to the question “Any firearms in the house?” is embedded in your arm?? 👿

  62. 2012 March 28 6:01 pm
    JustMary permalink

    #61 The longer we are married, the more selective my memory gets. 😆

  63. 2012 March 28 6:02 pm
    TLS permalink

    #63 No, but it won’t be great for them either 😉

  64. 2012 March 28 6:20 pm

    justrand permalink

    TLS, won’t it be great when the answer to the question “Any firearms in the house?” is embedded in your arm??

    I will do the embedding of something else in someone’s nether region methinks.

  65. 2012 March 28 6:22 pm
    brucefdb permalink

    Of course it will be a wonderful day for America if jugheadcare is struck down….but the libs will use that day to incite riots in the street and try to keep their black slaves fired up until election day when 150% of them will vote again.

  66. 2012 March 28 6:28 pm
    MI Conservative permalink

    bc It is a junior team but the invite came from a player who played last year and turned 21 this past winter. I’m hoping he is kidding. Last thing I need to do is get drunk in Detroit with a 21 yr old. HA

  67. 2012 March 28 6:29 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    If we needed an enemies list against the constitution here it is —

    Here are a few more pearls of constitutional wisdom from our elected representatives.
    Rep. Conyers cited the “Good and Welfare Clause” as the source of Congress’s authority [there is no such clause].
    Rep. Stark responded, “the federal government can do most anything in this country.”
    Rep. Clyburn replied, “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the federal government has anything to do with most of the stuff we do. How about [you] show me where in the Constitution it prohibits the federal government from doing this?”
    Rep. Hare said “I don’t worry about the Constitution on this, to be honest […] It doesn’t matter to me.” When asked, “Where in the Constitution does it give you the authority …?” He replied, “I don’t know.”
    Sen. Akaka said he “not aware” of which Constitutional provision authorizes the healthcare bill.
    Sen. Leahy added, “We have plenty of authority. Are you saying there’s no authority?”
    Sen. Landrieu told a questioner, “I’ll leave that up to the constitutional lawyers on our staff.”

    source: Volokh Conspiracy

  68. 2012 March 28 6:36 pm

    If there is ever a night of the long knives,
    we will have a long list.

  69. 2012 March 28 6:38 pm
    mulletover permalink

    I thought we all had firearms that were lost in boating accidents.

    They should just put that answer as a check-off block on the medical questionaire.

  70. 2012 March 28 6:42 pm

    These degenerate ditch carp of the prurient left swore an
    oath to uphold the constitution. Most of them have never even read it.
    May the pustules of pestilence anoint their pointy heads,
    may the fleas of a thousand camels inflame their crotches,
    may their dingus’s remain limp for the duration of their lives,
    and come November may their sterile testes be ground on the anvil of retribution.~~~~~~~but I bear them no ill will.

  71. 2012 March 28 6:47 pm
    mulletover permalink

    We should start every thread with IP’s homily.

  72. 2012 March 28 6:48 pm
    mulletover permalink

  73. 2012 March 28 7:50 pm
    justrand permalink

    Mullet, that’s where I lost all my firearms

  74. 2012 March 28 7:51 pm
    justrand permalink

    AND my boat!

  75. 2012 March 28 8:48 pm

    If scotus finds obamacare unconstitutional and throws it all out who will be the first to call the justices racist?

  76. 2012 March 28 9:02 pm
    bc3b permalink

    MI Conservative –

    With the beer prices at Comerica Park you’ll go broke before you get drunk.

  77. 2012 March 28 9:04 pm
    bc3b permalink

    “Brother, can we get a bailout?”

    Of course not silly Mullet. Bailouts are not for the “little people.” They are for the wealthy and well-connected. Isn’t it nice playing a game and knowing that you cannot lose, no matter how badly you play.

  78. 2012 March 28 9:20 pm
    HalJordan permalink

    Let’s get something straight here. ObamaCare is not “The Affordable Health Care Act”. It is an assassination attempt on the United States Constitution by a mentally sick man who wants to murder it. What Booth was to Lincoln, Obama wants to be to America’s Constitution.

  79. 2012 March 29 5:50 am
    justrand permalink

    Hal: “What Booth was to Lincoln, Obama wants to be to America’s Constitution”

    Well and truly spoken, Sir!!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.