Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« And What About Them Thunders?!? | Main | Thursday ObamaCare Death Watch »

June 27, 2012

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2aa69e2016767e8b813970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Vox Populi:

Comments

Jack is Back

Hate to go OT so soon but we woke up to Debby passing over with winds around 35 mph. We were exactly Ground Zero and the center of the eye was over the house. About a 2 hour window to walk the dogs on the beach. Surf was high and beach was sand covering the coquina. Lots of rain. But the folks south of us are the ones catching the most wind and rain.

NK

TomM-- can you post the internals of the NBC poll.

marlene

Janet,enjoy your day!

Patriot4Freedom

Left looks to be pulling out all the stops in the propaganda campaign to paint the mandate as the accepted, constitutionally-based precedent.

LUN to a Bloomberg article listing how 21 ConLaw professors were surveyed re ACA, and 19 think the mandate is constitutionally sound. Conclusion is that 5-4 against the mandate would be a politicized verdict of an "activist court."

Apologies in advance if this has been linked previously !

Clarice

Happy Birthday, Janet!

MaryD

Happy Birthday, Janet!

Soylent Red

Happy Birthday Janet! Is it 28 or 29 this year?

Mark in Houston

In Soccer there the Houston Dynamo

Mark in Houston

oops wrong theard

Janet

Thanks all. 54, Soylent! A bigger motorcycle will be my present but we're still searching.

Jack is Back

Happy Birthday Janet,

Light em if you have em:)

Ranger

Bloomberg article listing how 21 ConLaw professors were surveyed re ACA, and 19 think the mandate is constitutionally sound.

Would those be the same constitutional scholars who said there was definately no individual right to bear arms in the 2nd amendment? You know, that individual right that 7 justices saw when they looked at it.

rse

jib-years ago I had all 3 kids and at least 2 cats when we stayed for a Labor Day tropical storm and hubby stayed behind to do some work. I was almost out of Alabama before I left the tropical storm winds behind. I have rarely been as sore as gripping that steering wheel for 3 hours as the SUV was buffeted by those gusts and wind.

Of course my kids took it in stride with a "Mama will get us home."

Of course Red told me last night that in her mind Fla is home. And she has always loved storm weeks.

Of course that was before younger sis became an entertaining diva.

Keep your head low and remember how nice it is when system moves away. It sucked up everything contrary into it.

And Kim and Melinda-the WUWT readers are really eating up that accreditation UNESCO story and have been all night. Good-that needed to be known all over the West. Apparently it soon will be.

Rick Ballard

NK,

It's an adults poll with a 41D, 31R, 28DNV skew based upon 2008 actual vote. The actual 2008 adult skew was 33D, 29R, 38DNV.

IOW - GIGO squared.

bunkerbuster

Liberal commentators have for many months contemplated post-mandate politics should the Supremes strike that or all of the ACA.
It's telling that conservatives don't have much to say about their post-decision political goals or intentions.
Most liberals say striking ACA down is a long, windy road to single payer, as millions of ordinary Americans are forced to confront the fact that they simply cannot pay for healthcare they need.
But what if the Supremes don't strike it down, and tens of millions of Americans gain affordable healthcare.
What is the conservative political response to that?

Porchlight

Happy birthday to Janet! You are the very very best.

NK

RickB-- many thanks. with that group of responders they still have 'Bam at 47%. HAH!! he's a total goner. He's gone, 55 Repub Senators, and at least 5 Dem Senators whole vote for cloture cause they don't want to be next. 'Bam has destroyed the dems as a national party.

Melinda Romanoff

Rick-

No thumb on that scale.

Heh.

NK

BB has a somewhat lucid question @9:27-- BUT-- with one misleading statement. "Most liberals" may say they want single payer-- but Dem politicians virtual always say they won't vote for SP, because less than 30% of voters want SP socialized medicene. So there is a false premise in the generally lucid question. As to what comes next politically? let's see what CJ Roberts does tomorrow, then we can chat. A preview though-- the mandate struck down and the rest of the OCA left in place is the Dems WORST NIGHTMARE politically, because then they have to defend the economy AND how to pay for kind of socialized medicene without indentured mandate health policy buyers. Heh.

maryrose

Happy Birthday Janet!
Because I like you so much as a commentator I'd like you to consider this idea. My dad quit smoking at your age and got 30 more years of life.Just something to think about as you pull out all the stopson your big day.

Ignatz

Happy birthday, Janet!

Melinda Romanoff

NK-

Lebe da tar beby be.

narciso

Happy birthday, Janet, the uservey included a clerk for Warren, Choper,Obama's favorite professor, Lawrence Tribe, Ackerman, who's sort of the OWS member of the faculty, and that's just off the top of my head,

Captain Hate

It's telling that conservatives don't have much to say about their post-decision political goals or intentions.

It's telling that you think a bunch of monkey spankers playing guessing games are spending their time productively.

Danube of Thought

Minus 20 at Raz today.

Trails Romney by 1.

Ignatz

BB's question isn't lucid and is based on a false premise.
Our health insurance bill has risen far more since 2009 than ever before.
Tens of millions of people may be forced onto health insurance but for most it will be an expense they preferred not to take.
And many more millions will lose the coverage they have now as businesses opt for the fines over coverage. Various new taxes will kick in as well.

The conservative response should they lose power in congress and lose the WH will be to watch the Dems sink under the weight of their own idiotic mess.

If they retain power in congress and gain the WH and senate they should repeal a program most people dislike and which is a fiscal and operational disaster and which will become less and less popular as it impacts people and business.

If things stay as they are, then it will sink under its own weight just as in the first scenario, because we know from experience Barry is incapable of meaningful compromise even when it would help him politically (Keystone anyone?).

Janet

Thanks again, all. :)

Appalled

Bunkerbuster raises good questions, some of which we may know the answer to in a week or so. But, should Obamacare survive in its entirety, then the 2012 race becomes about (i) the economy and (ii) Obamacare -- keep it or repeal it.

If the Supremes find a way just to do in the mandate and keep the rest, then healthcare is going to get a redo in the next Congress, and that redo is going to have to be more bipartisan. The result may be a better bill, but less all-encompassing one. A single-payer result won't happen in the next Congress. Sorry. The Dem have never been able to sell Medicare for All when there was some leeway in the budget, and now they have taken on too much debt to afford it.

If the Supremes throw the whole bill out, I'm not sure what happens. Insurance comppanies have reconciled themselves to many of the changes in PPACA, and have put them into the policies they are selling, and they will not just get rid of them, unless corporations demand it. And I doubt that kicking out 26 year old kids out of the health plan is the first thing on the agenda of even the most heartless CFO.

maryrose

I caught a quick shot of Obama in Atlanta yesterday as I was flipping through channels. Someone needs to tell AxelPlouffe that mean-spirited and a surly attitude do not win re-election campaigns.Obammy appears disgruntled and downright nasty as he states the truth. "The economy is in the toilet and it is his fault."Campaign ad in the making.

rse

Ignatz-we have seen the same rise and that's with a huge deductible.

You pay out the nose but it's as if you do not have insurance because it's all out of pocket.

Except we now get phone calls from insurer urging us to have a physical because it's free. No, it simply kicked up those premiums.

Whatever the reforms are the rape of the self-insured who must pay high rates and after tax has to be factored in.

On an unrelated note, I get into the lion's den this afternoon at an ICLEI affiliate meeting explaining the relevant changes in the law and regs over the past year.

Pen and pad in hand and ears wide open.

Janet

The language of the left is scary.

"So when I meet a young Republican, I want to put him on a couch and be like, ‘how did this happen to you?’ and ‘how might you be saved?’"

bold mine.

Appalled

maryrose:

Before Obama gave that speech, he went to Atlanta's most famous grease and heartburn emporium (the Varsity) and ordered a bunch of chili-dogs (and some naked dogs, too). The resulting gastric distress may have caused him to be a bit grumpy.

(Note -- Varsity food is among the best greasy food in the country. But the results of consumption of it can be distressing.)

narciso

One doesn't see, any particular reason she would be an authority, it's arguable the bug began with the ERISA bill, thanks to Javits,
and it won't be solved anytime soon.


http://waatp.com/gate/index.html?to=http%253A%252F%252Fweb.law.umich.edu%252F_FacultyBioPage%252Ffacultybiopagenew.asp%253FID%253D47&people_id=15190496

Extraneus

Bloomberg article listing how 21 ConLaw professors were surveyed re ACA, and 19 think the mandate is constitutionally sound.

Wow, that's an amazing coincidence. 90% of ConLaw professors are liberals!

Did you also know that almost 100% of liberal economists are ... get this - this is really incredible ... Keynesians?

Extraneus

Happy Birthday, Janet!!!

NK

MelR-- what can I say, I'm both catholic and an 18th Century liberal, so I believe in both reasoned discourse-- and redemption. Of course I also believe in the Old Testament judgmental and vengeful God, something that our trolls should really worry about.

Melinda Romanoff

Ah, a Classical Liberal, as most of us are.

I'm just tired of the guilt game being turned up to eleventy.

Ignatz

--A single-payer result won't happen in the next Congress. Sorry. The Dem have never been able to sell Medicare for All when there was some leeway in the budget, and now they have taken on too much debt to afford it.--

Even under the rosiest assumptions the US will not be in a position to afford single payer for all for many, many years.
It is going to be an exceptional challenge to not go bankrupt over the single payer system we already are teetering under.

It's quite possible, as Rick keeps reminding us, that we are in a watershed decade wherein the welfare state doesn't just stop growing but is pared way back simply for economic survival. The combination of demographics and the impending Eurotrash nightmare constitute a stake and a mallet hovering over the heart of the current Nannystate. Somebody's going to give it an involuntary whack sooner or later.

NK

The guilt game-- I don't tolerate that either-- note my occasional truly vulgar profanity here. (BTW-- I do regret my occasional profanity here, it's wrong-- BUT AT LEAST IT'S SINCERE PROFANITY!)

NK

Ig@10:13 your mouth to Congress's ears.

Ignatz

--Ignatz-we have seen the same rise and that's with a huge deductible.--

Yep. Ours is $8K. And since Barrycare passed our premiums have risen about 50%.
Who could possibly have foreseen, for instance, that forcing insurers to go from a liability limit of a million or two per policy to unlimited liability might force a premium hike?

NK

24 Hours out until the Obamacarepolooza. Prediction Time-- Mine are:

Mandate and Insurance Policy Mandates paid for by the Mandate are Invalidated 6-3-- Kennedy writes majority

Medicaid expansion -- Upheld 7-2, Ginsburg writes premption decision (Scalia and Thomas Dissent-- Scalia writes)

balance of OCA Bill-- Appeals and underlying cases dismissed as premature and not yet ripe 7-2 Roberts writes decision (Scalia and Thomas Dissent w/o written opinion)

Jane

It's telling that conservatives don't have much to say about their post-decision political goals or intentions.

Are we "post-decision"? Gee I missed it and I was watching so closely!

"So when I meet a young Republican, I want to put him on a couch and be like, ‘how did this happen to you?’ and ‘how might you be saved?’"

I actually watched that Janet and it made me cringe - except that the guy asking the question only has one name - and he's unfamous and under 30 - and the 23 year old republican who responded gave a great answer.

My pal SE Cupp also did a very nice job despite the moans and groans from the morons.

BB Key

NK, Who are the dissenters on the mandate ?

Ignatz

Prediction Time-- Mine are:

They will leave a bigger mess with the law itself than they found and the commerce clause issue will be even muddier than now.

narciso

Toure, the 9/11 denialist, I don't call them truthers, because there is no truth to them,

narciso

Probably true, Ignatz, I'll be pleasantly surprised if they don't

NK

BB Key-- 2 are obvious -- the ethicaly challenged Kagan and the Wide Latina, one of Ginsburg or Breyer will surprise and vote to invalidate the mandate-- I just don't know which one. Whichever of Ginsburg and Breyer dissents, writes the dissent.
Remember what Yogi berra said about predictions, they are hard, especially about the future.

NK

Ig@10:30 is probably right. I think the mandate decision basically describes the Commerce Clause limits like pornography-- you know it when you see it.

Rick Ballard

I'm going to go with simple and clear. Struck down, 5-4, Thomas writes a brief opinion explaining that if Congress had wanted the mandate to be severable, it could have mentioned it somewhere within the 2700 pages.

narciso

The Quinnipiac survey for Florida, had a tie between unfavorable/favorable for Obama, and a five point unfavorable for Romney

NK

RickB-- who writes the Mandate Commerce Clause violation opinion?

peter

Latina, Ginsberg or Kagan would never cross their Alinskyite from Chicago--they fear for their pet cats.

Agent J

Happy Birthday Janet..

And I agree with Rick, it will go down either 5-4 or 6-3..

The Dem's will go down big this Nov..lot's and lot's of "not voting"..I know lifetime Dem's that are either not voting (esp for the President) or switching to the Rep's to make a statement..

Both Holder and Hilary will go down with F&F, then we have to flush it the second time to get Obama.

narciso

Well from this, it seems they expanded the Dem advantage by 6, from the last poll in Ohio, that looks when a Dem asked Rush if they would Spot Mondale a hundred electoral votes, than they'd be even;


http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/27/dueling-polls-obama-lead-narrowing-or-expanding-in-ohio/

Ignatz

--Latina, Ginsberg or Kagan would never cross their Alinskyite from Chicago--they fear for their pet cats.--

I don't know about the Wise Latina on Barrycare, but I'm still hanging onto a tiny thread of hope that she'll prove more sensible than first thought.
The Mantis certainly and Kevin James probably are lost causes.

jimmyk

While I haven't parsed every word they've spoken or written, my sense is that the Latina, like the proverbial blind squirrel, is more likely to invalidate than is Ginsberg or especially Breyer.

And no, bb's question was as stupid as ever, based on false premises ("conservatives don't have much to say") and fuzzy language ("they simply cannot pay for healthcare they need"). Please ignore him.

RichatUF

Happy Birthday Janet!!!

narciso

So, on the negative side, Rangel won the primary, against the Dominican Espaillat, on the positive, Barron lost, so mas hysteria will be moderated.

NK

jimmyK-- I've appeared before the Wide Latina-- in my experience she's as lost as a lost cause can be. Not a bad person, but dumb as a post and totally indoctrinated NYC Lib. She does rely heavily on her law clerks. But, to get her to invalidate would require a law clerk who's a combination George Patton and Jesus Christ.

Neo

O is for Outsourcing

The Obama campaign spent nearly $4,700 on telemarketing services from a Canadian telemarketing company called Pacific East between March and June, a Washington Free Beacon study of federal election filings shows.

Pacific East is not the only overseas telemarketing firm raking in cash from the president’s reelection campaign. Obama paid a call center in Manila, Philippines $78,314.10 for telemarketing services between the start of the campaign and March.

Pacific East is headquartered in British Columbia, Canada, though the campaign issued more than a dozen checks to a P.O. box located in Washington State—about 1,000 feet from the Canadian border and 9 miles from its headquarters in Canada.

Jim Ryan

Kennedy will decide it's not the Court's place to tell the People's Congress that the Commerce Clause means x and not y, and he will write the majority opinion, 5-4. NK the reason Roberts won't join in the fun is that he isn't in that advanced a stage of Souterism yet.

narciso

One is reminded that when it comes to right wing regimes, the distinctions between state and national sanctions go by the wayside,


http://www.therightsphere.com/2012/06/seriously-buzzfeed/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Extraneus

I'm predicting that they'll strike down Wickard v Filburn, knifing the last 70 years of Commerce Clause encroachment in the gut with a rusty blade. Why? Because I have no idea how they'll rule, but that's what I want.

RichatUF

I'll second Ignatz's 1030 prediction. More confusion, more paperwork, higher prices, longer waits...

NK

Kennedy is obviously never consistent, but he's never been shy invalidating laws he didn't like. I can't tell you how much I disagree with the prediction that Roberts allows Kennedy to write the majority opinion to UPHOLD. We'll seee tomorrow, as Yogi Berra said...

NK

Ex-- a colleague of mine went to a Scalia speech before the March arguments. Scalia flat out told the audience that there is no will in the Court to invalidate Wickard. Sad but true....

Neo

I see that Nora Ephron's parents wrote “Captain Newman, M.D.”
When I was a kid, I walked down to the water tower to see them shoot the part where Col. Bliss (Eddie Albert) makes his leap.

Agent J

I will further predict that most of will be wrong, and some of us have no idea what the hell we are talking about..

Sue

Happy birthday, Janet. Let me know how 54 feels, since I will see it this year myself. ::grin::

Jim Ryan

In order to maintain respectability, Kennedy will note that the bill is barely cogent or readable but he will say that that shortcoming is none of the Court's business. The gist of the majority opinion:

"If this crap is what the People's Congress wants, then by golly they can have it."

The easy way out, for Kennedy.

NK

BTW-- Wickard? the SCOTUS should hold it has no Commerce Clause precedent because it's a war case , not a Commerce Clause case. Is Korematsu good 14th Amendment law?

jimmyk

Not a bad person, but dumb as a post and totally indoctrinated NYC Lib.

The first two are why I gave her some chance. Breyer seems both smart and indoctrinated. Didn't she pleasantly surprise in some opinion earlier in the year?

Jane

Toure

Yeah - that's the one. I didn't know he is a truther.

Wasn't Nora Ephron married to Carl Bernstien during Watergate?

Jim Ryan

NK, I'm just spouting off. You know tons more about this than I do.

narciso

You know it's possible he had a good reason to be armed;


http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/27/2870294/miami-man-freed-in-controversial.html

Yes, she was, Jane, and he was featured played by Jack Nicolson, if memory serves.

Neo

Does anybody think that Kagan should have recused herself on ACA ?

I say yes. I think it haunt her if her vote means anything.

NK

JimmyK -- I have not read her concurring opinion in the SEIU case. I don't know if she wandered off the reservation there.

Breyer-- did you ever read his Living Constitution book? he writes excellent clear declarative sentences, he makes clever historical references, he frames the issues correctly-- and then reaches the exactly wrong conclusion. He's very smart, and completely SF indoctrinated.

NK

Neo-- IMO her refusal to recuse is a disgrace-- especially in light of her recusal in the Arizona SB 1070 case.

Rick Ballard

NK,

Roberts will carve a small chunk off Wickard in striking down the mandate. It won't look like much at first glance but it will establish a weak point to be exploited in the future.

Porchlight

Yes, she was, Jane, and he was featured played by Jack Nicolson, if memory serves.

Dustin Hoffman? If you're talking about the Carl Bernstein of Woodward & Bernstein in All The President's Men that is.

narciso

Well as Amar put it, tomorrow he realizes if his life work is a complete fraud, I think the verdict is already in,

glasater

Yay, Melinda! Duel fuel! :-)

narciso

Well I got it mostly right;


Bernstein was having an affair with their mutual friend,[11] the married British politician Margaret Jay. These events inspired Ephron to write the 1983 novel Heartburn,[12] [13] which was made into a 1986 film starring Jack Nicholson and Meryl Streep with a screenplay by Ephron.

NK

RickB-- I hope you're right. Wickard has bothered me since October 1979 when I read it for ConLaw. There was a war for national survival on, national mobilization, national wage and price controls on -- everything. Do you think a farmer stood a chance in that environment to invalidate an act of Congress? It doesn't matter that the controls were boosted prices-- ultimately, the wheat controls were theoretically adopted to maintain production, and the SCOTUS was not going to interefere with any national security judgments. Wickard's a war time decision as far as I'm concerned.

Ignatz

--I will further predict that most of will be wrong, and some of us have no idea what the hell we are talking about.--

Hey, I'm taking that a little personally. :)

narciso

So, a report on Ace, re Obama's speech in Ohio, indicates he says downturns take 10 years to wind down, that has rarely been true, even with the one in 1893,

DrJ

Happy Birthday, Janet! I still think you should get a Hog.

Sue

--I will further predict that most of will be wrong, and some of us have no idea what the hell we are talking about.--

That would be me. On both counts. I think it will be upheld and I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Jane

Doris Burke, the renowned ESPN reporter has solved the mystery of fast & Furious.

hit and run

Sue:
Let me know how 54 feels, since I will see it this year myself.

59 days and counting!

Ignatz

--Doris Burke, the renowned ESPN reporter has solved the mystery of fast & Furious.--

Hard hitting stuff, Jane.

I could see Doris in 1972-73:
Mr Liddy are you aware of anything untoward happening around the Watergate hotel? No? Good enough for me.

Jim Ryan

Jane, that's some article and thread over there!

Rick Ballard

NK,

I agree re Wickard. It's all the little emanations which sprouted under the penumbras generated by the Warren court which make reversal a daunting task. The Supremes can turn relatively quickly when they do something as blatantly stupid as Kelo or with their display of pique at Bush re CFR. The Wickard accretions are much like barnacles in their durability.

NK

Jane-- the Fortune article basically about 1 ATF agent may be factually accurate. It's also completely beside the point. The ATF may be incompetent in keeping weapons out of the hands of drug cartel murderers, and the field agents didn't intentionally walk guns. But the point is that it happened and the AG perjured himself about that, and he refuses to respond to a subpoena that proves his perjury. That is what the contempt resolution is about.

Porchlight

Oh yes narciso, I remember Heartburn.

rse

NK-Have you read The Forgotten Man by Schlaes? To me that's the frenzy that produced Wickard at great expense to the Constitution. Since the 2nd Bill of Rts was where FDR was going and Eleanor could hardly have been more leftist, I think the real desires of that WH are not well enough understood.

This is a link to a story on the kind of nonsense that is being put in place. I can read this and recognize the political and social theory trying to get put in place. Most parents and taxpayers won't even know about this until all adults are just a badge representing their skills and attitudes and whether they play compliantly.

I am only a little sarcastic when I write of the death of the concept of the individual. There is definitely a funeral planned. No one is planning to invite us to the wake.

We will, however, get the bill for food, champagne, Top Shelf liquor, and lovely out of season orchids to keep everyone cheery.
http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2012/06/13/03badges.h05.html?tkn=VVTFxfZmUnTrwnZw9greLk0bnLLzPz5qEvsj&cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS1

NK

Holder? my personal opinion is that he knew about the incompetence of F&F, but he let it go on because it served his gun control wet dreams. The ATF agents were stupid, but the evil lies with Holder's cynical (and deadly) use of the lost guns. His cynicism blew up in his face of course when Brian Terry was murdered.

Clarice

I think Kennedy is the justice most likely to pay heed to public opinion and he can't miss seeing how unpopular this law is and the outrageous means by which it was enacted.

Just saying.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon





Traffic

Wilson/Plame