Supreme Court

Liberals Still Shaken After Health Care Arguments

|

Writing at The Daily Caller, Roger Pilon, the director of the Cato Institute's Center for Constitutional Studies, has a little fun at the expense of those liberals who still cannot believe the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was so roughly treated during oral arguments by the Supreme Court:

The president himself weighed in on Monday, of course, with his unbridled pre-emptive warning to the Court, some of which he walked back on Tuesday. Yet the next day, there was the hapless White House press secretary, Jay Carney, trying to convince reporters that the president didn't intend to challenge the Court's authority, even as Attorney General Eric Holder was telling a different press gathering that Obama's comments were "appropriate." Can life in Washington be any more entertaining?

When liberals are in high dudgeon, you want to shelter the children. On Wednesday, for example, The Daily Beast plucked one David R. Dow from obscurity at the University of Houston law school to argue that if the justices overturn Obamacare, they should be impeached. Really! That puts the good professor in league with Newt Gingrich, who called for a similar remedy when he was riding high a few months ago, albeit in different sorts of cases. Liberals were up in arms then too, but on the other side, defending what the president on Monday called "an unelected group of people."

Read the whole thing here. In a recent column, Peter Suderman explored why "liberals can't even imagine the opposition's arguments against ObamaCare's individual mandate."

NEXT: Gallup: Despite Mexico's Drug Crackdown, Fewer Feel Safe and Trust the Police

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. No way dude who comes up with that stuff??

    http://www.Anon-Tool.tk

  2. “That puts the good professor in league with Newt Gingrich, who called for a similar remedy when he was riding high a few months ago, albeit in different sorts of cases. Liberals were up in arms then too, but on the other side, defending what the president on Monday called “an unelected group of people.””

    And they will not be able to explain why Obama’s critcicism of the court is justified and Gingrich’s is an abomination besides the idea that somehow healthcare is different.

    1. Neither Team Red nor Team Blue even pretends to be consistent. They appear to think that the voters won’t call them on their nonsense. Sadly, they’re right.

      1. I’d rather win than either be, or pretend to be, consistent. In fact if I can figure out a way to cheat, I will. What is this supposed to be — a game that should be played fairly? Let me out of the game, and then I’ll play fair if I choose to play.

    2. Depends on whose ox is being gored.

  3. Unelected like,say, a drug czar?

  4. Wow, you go on vacation for a week, and they stick in registration. I already miss the trolls.

    Also, someone took my original name. You snooze you lose.

    Anyhoo:

    Liberals were up in arms then too, but on the other side, defending what the president on Monday called “an unelected group of people.”

    Liberals have no ground to stand on here. If there’s one thing a liberal likes, he likes him some unelected bureaucrats… EPA anyone?

  5. Wait, isn’t the Constitution a living document? Maybe it’s growing in a way the Dowds, Holders and Obamas of this world don’t like.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.