Obama Health Care Law

Most Crucial Week In Supreme Court Since Gore V. Bush In 2000 Coming Next Week!

Ronald 1 Comment

There is no doubt about it! Next week, the last of the Supreme Court’s present term, will have an impact on America unseen since Gore V. Bush in 2000, which decided that George W. Bush would be our President, instead of Al Gore, who had a 540,000 popular vote lead in the Presidential Election Of 2000.

The week is crucial to both Barack Obama and his Democratic Party, and also to the opposition Republican Party.

It will have a massive impact on millions of Americans who may lose their chance to have health care, and could take away benefits that have already gone into play in the past two years, since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, known to many as “ObamaCare”!

After a century of struggle for health care for all, since the first suggestion under Republican President Theodore Roosevelt, we could see America finally coming to the level of available health care that all advanced industrial nations in Europe, Australia and Canada already have, or else we could go backwards and have a long wait before it can possibly happen again!

It would be a great tragedy if the main purpose of the Obama Presidency is wiped out, or weakened considerably, by the conservative Supreme Court. But this is one of the long range results of the Bush V. Gore case of 2000, rearing its ugly head now, a dozen years later If Al Gore had appointed two Justices to the Supreme Court, they would not have been John Roberts and Samuel Alito!

Also, the Supreme Court will decide if the discriminatory immigration laws of Arizona and Alabama will be allowed to stand, and if it is that result, it will be a major blow to human freedom, liberty, and dignity!

The lives of millions of undocumented immigrants will be put into a situation similar to what African Americans suffered from until the civil rights era started to challenge the prejudice, discrimination, and bias that existed for nearly a century!

Are we about to go backwards on human rights, and victimize immigrant groups, as often we have done in the past of American history?

These two cases are a battle for the future, against the past, and it could be a very tragic week!

One thing is very clear, no matter what the decisions, and that is that the MOST IMPORTANT reason to support Barack Obama and promote a Democratic controlled Congress is the future of the Supreme Court, with four members being ages 73-79, and at least a couple of them likely to be replaced in the next Presidential term.

We cannot afford a President Romney who would move the Supreme Court further to the right, making constitutional challenges on the issues of civil liberties and civil rights, and the power of the corporate world, unable to be resolved in a proper way for the next generation and more!

Mitt Romney Wants Us To “Trust Him”, Avoiding Specifics! Why Should We Trust The “Lie Master And Chameleon?”

Ronald Leave a comment

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the Republican Presidential nominee, refuses to be specific about his plans for the economy to deal with taxes and the budget.

Romney refuses to be specific about what he would do about the illegal immigration controversy.

He refuses to be specific about ANYTHING, instead preferring to attack President Barack Obama as having failed, and that he, as a businessman, has the answers as to how to create jobs, even though he did a poor job on that score as Massachusetts Governor for four years.

Mitt Romney also repudiates his major accomplishment, the Massachusetts Health Care plan, which was used by Obama as a model for his health care plan.

Mitt Romney has changed his views on EVERY topic and issue imaginable, recasting himself as a “severe” conservative, when the record shows that he is a moderate Republican in his views.

Romney expects us to “trust” him, even though he avoids specifics, and is a total chameleon! The term “flip flopper extraordinaire” fits him to a tee!

So what it comes down to is that Mitt Romney is an expert “Lie Master”, who wants us to forget that he seems to have no principles, and despite his great statements of how religious he is about his Mormon faith, he will not even explain his religious viewpoints, evading it totally!

And if someone is so “religious”, then why can he not tell the truth about anything, or be consistent in his views on anything?

Why is he a “weather vane”, who changes direction on a moment’s notice?

This is the man who wants our support in November, running against a man who has already changed the course of history in numerous ways that are long lasting and productive, and has done a great deal economically to head us in the proper direction.

Yes, more needs to be done economically, but enough has been done, and the principles of the man who did it, to make any sane person realize that a “Lie Master” chameleon like Mitt Romney is NOT the better choice to be our President!

And think about it: Richard Nixon told us to “trust him”, and elect him on a “secret” plan to end the war in Vietnam, which he did not have! We know the kind of President Richard Nixon turned out to be, a “Lie Master”, who was forced out of the Presidency, and is a stain on the history of that office, despite some positive developments, which do not make up for the shortcomings of a person we chose to “trust” without facts or evidence!

Return From Vacation To Horrible News! Mitt Romney, And The Ugandan Catholic Bishops!

Ronald 4 Comments

Having just returned from vacation in Charleston and Savannah, and only having contributed one entry about the Wisconsin recall election results while on vacation, the author returns to horrible news, making one wonder about humanity!

Mitt Romney has made it clear that if the Supreme Court rules against the Obama Health Care law later this month, he will not protect the millions with preexisting conditions, who would, effectively, left out of health care by such an action.

Romney has also made it clear that he feels the message of Wisconsin is that the American people do not wish to fund more jobs for badly needed teachers, firefighters, and police officers, an unbelievable conclusion based on one state’s results, and a slap in the face of the American people, and the honorable professions that are so essential to the nation, and are being treated as if they are “servants” who can be hired and fired as Mitt Romney loves to do with everyone, due to his obscene wealth, greed, and selfishness!

Mitt Romney is becoming worse by the day, a true monster who comes across as the worst GOP nominee in American history, with his lack of humanity or concern for the needs of the American nation!

The thought that this man without a conscience could actually become President is totally sickening!

But then, the news gets worse, as we learn that in Uganda, the Catholic bishops are endorsing legislation to kill gays or put them in prison for life, a bill already promoted by the evangelical Christian movement, and setting up a situation that would lead to a Holocaust not that different than the one in World War II against gays, as well as Jews and other groups, which was ignored by the then Pope Pius IX!

Pope Benedict XVI needs to condemn this endorsement immediately, and crack down on the Catholic bishops of Uganda, but will he? He is condemning the “radical” statements of nuns who are promoting a open mindedness on many issues within the Church, so can one be assured that he will take steps to crack down on the hate of the Ugandan Catholic bishops?

This is just more proof how organized religion has lost its humanity, and is about to make gays the new victims of a modern day Holocaust in the name of God!

This news about Mitt Romney and the Ugandan bishops is enough to make one wish to go back on vacation, and shut out the cruel world we live in!

The Momentous Month Of June 2012 In The Supreme Court: Health Care And Illegal Immigration

Ronald Leave a comment

June 2012 will go down in history as one of the most momentous months in the history of the Supreme Court.

The Obama Affordable Health Care Law will be judged as to whether it is constitutional, and allow a mandate on all citizens to purchase and have health insurance. This is the crux of the Obama Presidency in the first term, and will have a dramatic effect on the Presidential and Congressional elections of 2012, along with impacting millions of citizens no matter what the decision.

The Court will also decide the constitutionality of the Arizona SB1070 law, dealing with the right of that state and others to control illegal immigration, seen as an issue of human rights by many, and also as an issue of states rights against the American national government.

There will be other cases decided, of course, but the main attention will be paid to these two crucial cases, which, no matter what the decision of the Court, will have an enduring effect on the nation for many years into the future!

Gun Rights, Mass Murder, Chief Justice Warren Burger, And The Second Amendment

Ronald Leave a comment

The National Rifle Association is riding high, having succeeded in promotion of “Stand Your Ground” laws which has led to the deaths of hundreds of victims in the past ten years, including Trayvon Martin in Florida in February.

The NRA was the host of the rant of Ted Nugent last week, threatening the life of President Barack Obama, and calling for harm on Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Attorney General Eric Holder.

The NRA sat back and had no reaction to the assassination attempt against Arizona Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords in Tucson in January 2011.

The NRA had no reaction to the mass murder of 32 people at Virginia Tech five years ago this week.

The NRA had no reaction to the mass murder at Columbine High School in Colorado in 1999, also occurring this week.

The NRA continues to say that guns do not kill people, and that instead, people kill people, but fight against any sensible background checks, or the banning of assault weapons.

They continue to state that the Second Amendment allows uninhibited ownership of guns by anyone who wishes to collect them.

A Supreme Court case in June 2010 in McDonald V. Chicago further cemented their 2008 decision in District of Columbia V. Heller, with the five Supreme Court conservatives deciding both cases, in favor of gun owner rights.

The thought that such an important decision came about by a bare 5-4 vote on ideological grounds is very disturbing, and belies the statement of former Chief Justice Warren Burger, appointed by Richard Nixon in 1969 and serving to 1986.

In 1991, the former Chief Justice stated that the Second Amendment was subject to fraud by special interest groups, does not guarantee the right to have firearms at all, and was designed to provide state militia to promote defense of the state.

But then, as conservative as Burger was thought to be in his tenure on the Court, it is clear that the conservative majority on the Court today is far more right wing than any since the 1920s, a foreboding of the damage they may do in many key cases to be decided and announced between now and the end of June, including the Obama Health Care legislation!

Is It The Kennedy Court, Rather Than The Roberts Court?

Ronald 1 Comment

The more one analyzes the US Supreme Court in recent years, it is more clear than ever that we should call it the Anthony Kennedy Court, rather than the John Roberts Court!

Kennedy, appointed to the Supreme Court by Ronald Reagan in 1988 as a compromise choice who could pass Senate muster, after the well publicized rejection of Robert Bork in 1987, has now been on the Court for 24 years, and is seen more than ever as the “swing vote” on the Court, first sharing that with former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, until her retirement in 2005, but now all by himself as the most significant vote on the Court.

Kennedy, basically a conservative but with an open mind, has leaned to the Right two thirds of the time, and to the Left one third of the time on the average.

It is seen by just about all Court watchers that Kennedy’s vote on the Obama Health Care legislation is crucial, as to whether it survives or goes down.

Kennedy disappointed many on the left in being in the majority on the Bush V. Gore case of 2000, the Citizens United case of 2010, and the Strip Search case of this past Monday. But at the same time, he upheld the rights of gays to privacy in the Lawrence V. Texas case of 2003, enraging fellow Justice Antonin Scalia.

His questioning about the Obama Health Care law last week showed the quandary he is in, and he is getting pressure from many sources to uphold the law, but the belief is that he will not give in to pressure, and might even be tempted to go with the other conservative Justices in overturning the law.

The theory is that IF Kennedy goes with upholding the law, that Chief Justice John Roberts will join him, making it a 6-3 vote, but that if he decides to negate the law, then the vote will be a partisan 5-4 vote against the legislation.

So to call the present Court the Kennedy Court seems very appropriate!

The Need For Supreme Court Reform By Constitutional Amendment

Ronald 1 Comment

THe controversy over the US Supreme Court has grown in recent years, with the Bush V. Gore case of 2000, where the Court, by partisan majority, chose a President; and the Citizens United case of 2010, which also, by partisan majority, the Court claimed that corporations and labor unions had the same right to freedom of speech in politics as did ordinary citizens, and has led to the Super PACs that are now distorting campaign finance in the Presidential Election of 2012.

That, along with the concern that the Court might strike down the Obama Health Care legislation by another 5-4 partisan majority, and the Strip Search decision of the Court this past Monday, also by partisan majority, makes many wonder if there is not a need for Supreme Court reform.

This is nothing new, as a century ago, during their Progressive Party campaigns for President of former President Theodore Roosevelt in 1912 and Wisconsin Senator Robert La Follette, Sr. in 1924, as well as proposals of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937, suggestions for changes, including constitutional amendment changes by TR and La Follette. were advocated.

Of course, the constitutional amendment route is a very difficult one, and it could be a long road to necessary change, but even if not imminent, the changes that this blogger proposes are worthy of consideration, if not adoption.

These proposed changes would include the following:

A term on the Supreme Court should not be lifetime, but instead 15 years maximum, which in most cases, would mean the Justice would be over 70 at the end of the term.

No one should serve on the Supreme Court past the age of 80, with only a handful who have so served, including outstanding men, such as Oliver Wendell Holmes and John Paul Stevens. Losing such luminaries at age 80 is a shame, but no one can be considered as irreplaceable, as the President and the Pope are replaceable, as well as any other position in any government!

While 5-4 decisions on normal cases would continue, any attempt to override legislation passed by Congress should require a super majority of 6-3 to have such effect. Since we have a two thirds vote for a constitutional amendment to pass Congress and go to the states for ratification; a two thirds vote to override a Presidential veto; and a two thirds vote to ratify a treaty in the US Senate, it seems reasonable that a two thirds vote should be necessary to overturn a congressional law.

What these suggested amendments do is allow turnover on the Court more regularly, and stop the image of the Supreme Court as being out of touch with America, and as an arrogant, unelected group that can hold back progress!

Barack Obama On The Attack Against Republicans And Conservatives: Critical Of The Supreme Court And The Paul Ryan Budget Plan

Ronald Leave a comment

Barack Obama has gone on the offensive against conservative and Republican philosophy, both on the Supreme Court and in Congress.

Already throwing down the gauntlet to the Supreme Court yesterday, Obama pointed out that the commerce clause and Supreme Court case history and two Circuit Court Judges (Laurence Silberman and Jeffrey Sutton) are a call for backing the Obama Health Care law, and it is clear that IF the Court declares it unconstitutional, the Court itself will be an issue in the upcoming Presidential campaign of 2012. And it is certain that the KEY issue of 2012, no matter what happens, is to realize that the future judicial appointments to the Supreme Court and the lower courts matter more than ANYTHING economic or foreign policy related, because the judiciary is a lifetime appointment!

If we are upset over a 5-4 Court to the right, imagine a 7-2 Court under a Republican President when and if Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer, both in their 70s, leave the Court over the next four to eight years!

But today, President Obama is also mounting a full scale assault on the Paul Ryan budget plan adopted by the House Republican majority for the second year in a row, which includes massive tax cuts to the rich beyond the Bush tax cuts, and major cuts in Medicare and Medicaid and all other domestic spending programs that benefit the poor and the struggling middle class, as well as the elderly.

Obama is calling it today’s “Social Darwinism”, the prevalent philosophy of the Gilded Age of the late 19th century, a period being matched and surpassed with the growing concentration of wealth in the top one percent of the population in the past ten years, and now threatening to be even more concentrated under the budget plan of the House Budget Committee Chairman.

And with the growing possibility that Ryan might be the Vice Presidential running mate of Mitt Romney, the future of the nation is at stake on the Supreme Court and lower courts, and also on the Presidential and Vice Presidential level, along with the Congressional actions in future years.

This is a battle for survival of the middle class, and the continuation of understanding the plight of the poor, as class division and the potential for class warfare grows!

The Destruction Of Civil Liberties: Anyone Arrested For Any Charge Can Be Strip Searched Multiple Times, By Declaration Of The Right Wing Majority Of Supreme Court!

Ronald 1 Comment

An extremely shocking, disastrous decision of the US Supreme Court today will bring the power of the legal system down heavy on ANYONE arrested and detained, no matter how minor the infraction, including traffic violations!

By a straight 5-4 conservative majority of the Supreme Court, a person arrested for failure to pay traffic fines, which he had actually paid, led to six days of detainment in a local jail, and constant, repetitive strip searches that left the person involved feeling a loss of his masculinity, self esteem and self image.

This is not for serious criminals who are accused of murder and rape and robbery alone; it is for ANY charge, no matter how minor, and not only for convicted criminals, but any suspect on any accusation that leads to arrest and detention.

The local police gain unusual powers and control, and what makes it any different than a dictatorship, one may ask?

It is one thing if someone is thought to have contraband on his person, but for everyone for any minor offense or accusation? This is absolutely CRAZY, but nothing can be done about it, and all of us will face the fear that if by chance we are ever detained for ANY reason, we will lose our sense of dignity and self worth!

And realize this includes not only men, but women and CHILDREN as well!

This is insanity, and shows the dangers when the “wrong” President is in office!

This is the result, long term, of the Bush V. Gore case, where the Supreme Court, on a purely partisan basis, gave George W. Bush the Presidency over Al Gore, which led to Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito in 2005 and 2006!

These two men are proving to be hard line conservatives, and now we must wonder if Roberts, who supposedly worries about the image of the Court, will do what is right on the Obama Health Care legislation in June, and prevent a purely partisan decision by 5-4.

But it also makes one wonder about Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee, who sometimes goes against the conservative majority on the Court, and who could have prevented this nightmare decision today, but chose not to do so.

Will he stay with the conservative majority again on the Obama Health Care law? This is crucial, since if he joins the four liberals on the Court, it is seen as likely that Roberts would join that side, but if Kennedy stays with the conservatives, Roberts assuredly will stay with them as well.

These are the consequences of electing a President, and makes the re-election of Barack Obama even more urgent, as otherwise, the Court will become no better than a Fascist Court in spirit, if not in name!

This decision of the Court will damage the reputation of that body, and it is something all of us who care about civil liberties will mourn for a long time!

Just be very careful NEVER to face arrest, as if we can control that!

Showdowns Between Presidents And The Supreme Court: Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Nixon, And Obama

Ronald Leave a comment

President Barack Obama today challenged the Supreme Court to support the Obama Health Care legislation, which was argued last week before the Court in an unprecedented three day, six hour presentation by the two sides in the case.

Obama made clear that two conservative Circuit Court judges, Laurence Silberman and Jeffrey Sutton, have backed the legislation as constitutional.

Just by simply answering a question from a journalist, what Obama has done is thrown down the gauntlet to the Court, as he did when he criticized them face to face at the State of the Union Address in 2010, shortly after the decision in the Citizens United case, the most unpopular decision of the Court since Bush V. Gore in 2000.

As the author listened to Obama’s challenge to the Court, it brought back the history of Presidential challenges to the Supreme Court in the past.

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson challenged the Court’s authority, causing antagonism between both Presidents and Chief Justice John Marshall.

Abraham Lincoln was critical of the Dred Scott Decision before his Presidency, and was in conflict with Chief Justice Roger Taney during the Civil War, until Taney’s death in 1864.

Franklin D. Roosevelt denounced the Supreme Court over challenges to the New Deal programs, and tried to “pack” the Court, and Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes defended the Court from the attacks of the President.

Richard Nixon denounced the Court as too liberal and permissive under Chief Justice Earl Warren, when Nixon ran for President, with Warren swearing him in as President, and then retiring later in 1969. Nixon then had the opportunity to make four Supreme Court appointments and turn the Court more conservative.

And now, Barack Obama has challenged the Court for the second time, with Chief Justice John Roberts expressing discontent, after the fact, to the first criticism of the Court, expressed during the State of the Union Address.

Wondering what the ultimate relationship between Obama, and the Chief Justice and the entire Court in the future, will be, is one of the key events of this election year!

Certainly, Obama is in good company, distinguished company, with the other Presidents who have challenged the Supreme Court!