Yuval Levin at National Review Online reviews some of the practical effects of yesterday’s Supreme Court decision:

Combined, these two rather arbitrary acts of revision mean that if the CBO reassesses the law’s effect on the number of Americans without insurance (which it certainly will do) using the same methods it used originally, it is likely to find a much smaller reduction in the uninsured.

Read the rest of this entry »

Drudge and the AP are reporting that the Supreme Court has judged the individual mandate not unconstitutional.  Glenn Beck suggests that the reason Chief Justice John Roberts joined the liberals on this vote (making it 6-3 rather than 5-4) is so that he could write the opinion and make it as narrow as possible, minimizing the damage it can do in the future.  (Given the impressions I came away with from constitutional-law class about the two partial-birth-abortion Supreme Court cases, I can believe it.  Roberts is a wily one—that is, according to some people’s interpretation of his actions.)

(Correction and updates below the fold.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Change Happens

June 27, 2012

I stopped by the bargain rack at the poster store today.  Guess what was on clearance:

(The discounted poster shows the face of Barack Obama and the words “Change can happen”.)

It sure can.

No one is buying Obama any more; so the store is trying to get rid of him.  There’s a metaphor somewhere in there.

We already knew that Barack Obama was a full-time campaigner (with a side job as president, when he can fit it in), but this is novel:  The Obama campaign now recommends that you register your wedding with them—that you actually ask your wedding guests to donate to Obama’s re-election effort (i.e., to fund ads smearing Romney?) in lieu of gifts—explaining that four more years would be “a gift that we can all appreciate”!

Read the rest of this entry »

A House committee voted on Wednesday to recommend that Attorney General Eric Holder be held in contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with a House investigation of Operation Fast and Furious for more than a year.  (The full House is expected to vote on it next week.)

In response, as PJ Media point out, the White House criticized House Republicans for supposedly not doing their job

Read the rest of this entry »

Last Friday, President Obama decreed that what Congress has thus far declined to do, he will do by himself—in effect, amnesty for (by his administration’s own conservative estimate) 800,000 illegal immigrants (CNN, Fox)—even though President Obama himself is on record, as recently as 2011, at least twice (March, September), admitting that that would be unconstitutional:

Read the rest of this entry »

Obama vs. Obama

June 19, 2012

Today’s recommended reading comes from National Review Online.  Rich Lowry and John Lott compare what President (not candidate) Obama said not long ago to what he’s saying now (he doesn’t compare favorably…), while Michael Barone discusses how the voters feel about that (angry).  Read the whole thing (all three), but here are some excerpts:

Lott, “Obama’s Revisionism” (“He predicted a strong economy, but blames his failure on Bush”):

In March 2009, when some economists, such as Harvard’s Greg Mankiw, questioned whether the stimulus would produce the promised benefits, Obama supporter Paul Krugman attacked their honesty. In one blog post at the New York Times entitled “Roots of evil,” Krugman accused Mankiw of “more than a bit of deliberate obtuseness” and claimed that “we can expect fast growth.”

Read the rest of this entry »