RNC Shoots Itself in the Mouth

[Liability]

The RNC shoots itself in the mouth
By Tom Goldstein on Mar 29, 2012 at 8:01 pm

Opponents of the Affordable Care Act and the Obama Administration really could not have had a better week. They did a tremendous job framing their constitutional argument against the statute to the public, the lawyers on their side were brilliant, and it appears that they had a receptive Supreme Court majority. It was an 11 on a scale of 10.

Now this. The RNC released an advertisement (embedded in the story linked below) with audio from the halting beginning to Don Verrilli’s oral argument on the individual mandate to make the point that (as the ad’s title says) “ObamaCare: It’s a tough sell.” So far as I can tell, it is less a real ad that would actually run than a stunt intended to draw attention – no less a stunt than the DNC surely has done in lots of other contexts.

But Bloomberg News had the good sense to actually compare the actual argument audio with what the RNC distributed. It turns out to have been materially doctored. As the Bloomberg piece says, “A review of a transcript and recordings of those moments shows that Verrilli took a sip of water just once, paused for a much briefer period, and completed his thought, rather than stuttering and trailing off as heard in the doctored version.”

I’ve been in practice for seventeen years, and the blog has existed for ten, and this is the single most classless and misleading thing I’ve ever seen related to the Court. It is as if the RNC decided to take an incredibly serious and successful argument that has the chance to produce a pathbreaking legal victory for a conservative interpretation of the Constitution, drag it through the mud, and vomit on it. I would be shocked if a serious conservative lawyer would stand by the ad.

SCOTUSblog

It would have been far less verbose to just call, "cheap shot."

And that ad is kind of a cheap shot.

But, as bad-pun / cheap shots go, it's at least accurate.

ObamaCare is a hard sell.

In fact, I think it's toast.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Wow. Just fucking wow.

I keep telling you all Jillian is not right in the head

Answer the simple question. When the GOP pops their cookies, do you swallow or spit?

 

[The Rabbi]

The RNC shoots itself in the mouth
By Tom Goldstein on Mar 29, 2012 at 8:01 pm

Opponents of the Affordable Care Act and the Obama Administration really could not have had a better week. They did a tremendous job framing their constitutional argument against the statute to the public, the lawyers on their side were brilliant, and it appears that they had a receptive Supreme Court majority. It was an 11 on a scale of 10.

Now this. The RNC released an advertisement (embedded in the story linked below) with audio from the halting beginning to Don Verrilli’s oral argument on the individual mandate to make the point that (as the ad’s title says) “ObamaCare: It’s a tough sell.” So far as I can tell, it is less a real ad that would actually run than a stunt intended to draw attention – no less a stunt than the DNC surely has done in lots of other contexts.

But Bloomberg News had the good sense to actually compare the actual argument audio with what the RNC distributed. It turns out to have been materially doctored. As the Bloomberg piece says, “A review of a transcript and recordings of those moments shows that Verrilli took a sip of water just once, paused for a much briefer period, and completed his thought, rather than stuttering and trailing off as heard in the doctored version.”

I’ve been in practice for seventeen years, and the blog has existed for ten, and this is the single most classless and misleading thing I’ve ever seen related to the Court. It is as if the RNC decided to take an incredibly serious and successful argument that has the chance to produce a pathbreaking legal victory for a conservative interpretation of the Constitution, drag it through the mud, and vomit on it. I would be shocked if a serious conservative lawyer would stand by the ad.

SCOTUSblog

It would have been far less verbose to just call, "cheap shot."

And that ad is kind of a cheap shot.

But, as bad-pun / cheap shots go, it's at least accurate.

ObamaCare is a hard sell.

In fact, I think it's toast.

One is surpirsed the justices didn't laugh the gov'ts lawyer out of the courtroom. I pity the man. He is a bright guy and very accomplished. But he got handed a shit sandwich and had to eat every bite.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wow. Just fucking wow.

I keep telling you all Jillian is not right in the head

Answer the simple question. When the GOP pops their cookies, do you swallow or spit?

Are you the "Liberal Intellectual Elite"? No one else on your side wants the title, I think you're it

 

[GuyPinestra]

How appropriate...

Liberal
Intellectual
Elite

 

[jillian]

The RNC shoots itself in the mouth
By Tom Goldstein on Mar 29, 2012 at 8:01 pm

Opponents of the Affordable Care Act and the Obama Administration really could not have had a better week. They did a tremendous job framing their constitutional argument against the statute to the public, the lawyers on their side were brilliant, and it appears that they had a receptive Supreme Court majority. It was an 11 on a scale of 10.

Now this. The RNC released an advertisement (embedded in the story linked below) with audio from the halting beginning to Don Verrilli’s oral argument on the individual mandate to make the point that (as the ad’s title says) “ObamaCare: It’s a tough sell.” So far as I can tell, it is less a real ad that would actually run than a stunt intended to draw attention – no less a stunt than the DNC surely has done in lots of other contexts.

But Bloomberg News had the good sense to actually compare the actual argument audio with what the RNC distributed. It turns out to have been materially doctored. As the Bloomberg piece says, “A review of a transcript and recordings of those moments shows that Verrilli took a sip of water just once, paused for a much briefer period, and completed his thought, rather than stuttering and trailing off as heard in the doctored version.”

I’ve been in practice for seventeen years, and the blog has existed for ten, and this is the single most classless and misleading thing I’ve ever seen related to the Court. It is as if the RNC decided to take an incredibly serious and successful argument that has the chance to produce a pathbreaking legal victory for a conservative interpretation of the Constitution, drag it through the mud, and vomit on it. I would be shocked if a serious conservative lawyer would stand by the ad.

SCOTUSblog

It would have been far less verbose to just call, "cheap shot."

And that ad is kind of a cheap shot.

But, as bad-pun / cheap shots go, it's at least accurate.

ObamaCare is a hard sell.

In fact, I think it's toast.

you know, it may be. but it shouldn't have been. the communication on this issue has been horrible.

i heard someone call verilli the "bill buchner" of the supreme court. that wasn't quite wrong.

 

[jillian]

SCOTUSblog

It would have been far less verbose to just call, "cheap shot."

And that ad is kind of a cheap shot.

But, as bad-pun / cheap shots go, it's at least accurate.

ObamaCare is a hard sell.

In fact, I think it's toast.

One is surpirsed the justices didn't laugh the gov'ts lawyer out of the courtroom. I pity the man. He is a bright guy and very accomplished. But he got handed a shit sandwich and had to eat every bite.

did he not expect the questions he got? if he wasn't properly mooted, that's on him. if he froze...well, it happens, but it shouldn't have happened.

the answer to their questions was all of the reasons that the heritage foundation wanted the individual mandate in the first place when hillary was working on health care.

he should have been able to do it in his sleep.

*edit* and what really ticked me off about the argument...what's really inexcusable... was him conceding that if they could do this they could do "anything". but aside from the fact that it isn't the case, and health care is uniquely suited to a commerce clause argument, you never ever concede a sweeping point like that. the answer is "your honor, "everything" isn't before this Court, and we can trust in the wisdom of the court to address future issues as they come along"...

and then he should have gone back to what he needed to say.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And yet Breyer thinks the government can mandate you to buy anything at all

 

[GHook93]

Obaminationcare is a step forward it's a sidestep! John Kerry's plan was a step forward!

For every step forward we make, the pubs drag us backward two steps. Thanks to their crooked SCOTUS, we'll lose a very real chance to have 21st century medicine in the United States AND, we can expect insurance rates to go sky high after they make their "decision".

Anyone who believes this is a carefully considered question by an unbiased group are just plain stupid. Ask yourself when the last time you saw one of the conservative justice NOT side with the pubs. The answer is, NEVER. If you actually listened today, you heard the conservatives legislate from the bench and then laugh when they were called on it.

The rw's this loss to the American people. They will celebrate because they can keep their free health care, except its not free. Those of us who believe in personal responsibility will go on paying for those who don't.

 

[jillian]

And yet Breyer thinks the government can mandate you to buy anything at all

the commerce clause is pretty broad. and you don't know what breyer thinks. you know what his questions were.

 

[Conservative]

The RNC shoots itself in the mouth
By Tom Goldstein on Mar 29, 2012 at 8:01 pm

Opponents of the Affordable Care Act and the Obama Administration really could not have had a better week. They did a tremendous job framing their constitutional argument against the statute to the public, the lawyers on their side were brilliant, and it appears that they had a receptive Supreme Court majority. It was an 11 on a scale of 10.

Now this. The RNC released an advertisement (embedded in the story linked below) with audio from the halting beginning to Don Verrilli’s oral argument on the individual mandate to make the point that (as the ad’s title says) “ObamaCare: It’s a tough sell.” So far as I can tell, it is less a real ad that would actually run than a stunt intended to draw attention – no less a stunt than the DNC surely has done in lots of other contexts.

But Bloomberg News had the good sense to actually compare the actual argument audio with what the RNC distributed. It turns out to have been materially doctored. As the Bloomberg piece says, “A review of a transcript and recordings of those moments shows that Verrilli took a sip of water just once, paused for a much briefer period, and completed his thought, rather than stuttering and trailing off as heard in the doctored version.”

I’ve been in practice for seventeen years, and the blog has existed for ten, and this is the single most classless and misleading thing I’ve ever seen related to the Court. It is as if the RNC decided to take an incredibly serious and successful argument that has the chance to produce a pathbreaking legal victory for a conservative interpretation of the Constitution, drag it through the mud, and vomit on it. I would be shocked if a serious conservative lawyer would stand by the ad.

SCOTUSblog

It's called dramatic/artistic license.

Artistic license | Define Artistic license at Dictionary.com

the freedom to create an artwork, musical work, or piece of writing based on the artist's interpretation and mainly for effect; also called poetic license, etc.

 

[jillian]

The RNC shoots itself in the mouth
By Tom Goldstein on Mar 29, 2012 at 8:01 pm

Opponents of the Affordable Care Act and the Obama Administration really could not have had a better week. They did a tremendous job framing their constitutional argument against the statute to the public, the lawyers on their side were brilliant, and it appears that they had a receptive Supreme Court majority. It was an 11 on a scale of 10.

Now this. The RNC released an advertisement (embedded in the story linked below) with audio from the halting beginning to Don Verrilli’s oral argument on the individual mandate to make the point that (as the ad’s title says) “ObamaCare: It’s a tough sell.” So far as I can tell, it is less a real ad that would actually run than a stunt intended to draw attention – no less a stunt than the DNC surely has done in lots of other contexts.

But Bloomberg News had the good sense to actually compare the actual argument audio with what the RNC distributed. It turns out to have been materially doctored. As the Bloomberg piece says, “A review of a transcript and recordings of those moments shows that Verrilli took a sip of water just once, paused for a much briefer period, and completed his thought, rather than stuttering and trailing off as heard in the doctored version.”

I’ve been in practice for seventeen years, and the blog has existed for ten, and this is the single most classless and misleading thing I’ve ever seen related to the Court. It is as if the RNC decided to take an incredibly serious and successful argument that has the chance to produce a pathbreaking legal victory for a conservative interpretation of the Constitution, drag it through the mud, and vomit on it. I would be shocked if a serious conservative lawyer would stand by the ad.

SCOTUSblog

It's called dramatic/artistic license.

Artistic license | Define Artistic license at Dictionary.com

the freedom to create an artwork, musical work, or piece of writing based on the artist's interpretation and mainly for effect; also called poetic license, etc.

well, it was a work of fiction

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And yet Breyer thinks the government can mandate you to buy anything at all

the commerce clause is pretty broad. and you don't know what breyer thinks. you know what his questions were.

No, sorry, the "Commerce Clause" isn't that broad and I can't wait until Wickard is finally overturned.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Well, if the health care reform gets shot down a lot of people will be upset. No more coverage for pre-existing conditions? No keeping your kids under your policy until they can afford their own?

Sounds like a Democrat majority in the making.

26 yo children?

Hey why not 30? 40? 50? 60?

 

[Conservative]

SCOTUSblog

It's called dramatic/artistic license.

Artistic license | Define Artistic license at Dictionary.com

the freedom to create an artwork, musical work, or piece of writing based on the artist's interpretation and mainly for effect; also called poetic license, etc.

well, it was a work of fiction

as was Obamacare.

 

[jillian]

It's called dramatic/artistic license.

Artistic license | Define Artistic license at Dictionary.com

well, it was a work of fiction

as was Obamacare.

tell it to the heritage foundation. they disagreed... before they agreed.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It's called dramatic/artistic license.

You’ve got to be kidding.

 

[jillian]

Well, if the health care reform gets shot down a lot of people will be upset. No more coverage for pre-existing conditions? No keeping your kids under your policy until they can afford their own?

Sounds like a Democrat majority in the making.

26 yo children?

Hey why not 30? 40? 50? 60?

they would have their own coverage. and i don't recall anyone suggesting it.

if someone gets a post graduate education, they might work, but they wouldn't be in a job where there's insurance coverage.

i know...that's something you wouldn't understand.

 

[Flopper]

Well, if the health care reform gets shot down a lot of people will be upset. No more coverage for pre-existing conditions? No keeping your kids under your policy until they can afford their own?

Sounds like a Democrat majority in the making.

Support for the law has been increasing just as Obama predicted. In a CNN poll released 2 days ago, only 30% wanted to see the law overturned. There is nothing that would garner more support for the law, than SCOTUS shooting it down. Obama would certainly be in a position to take advantage of it considering Romney's plan would leaves 30 million without insurance, brings back preexisting conditions qualification for insurance including children, and allow insurance companies to stop benefits for the most seriously ill.

CNN Poll: Should health care law be overturned? – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

 

[Lumpy 1]

Yup... another poll..

--------------------


Thursday, March 29, 2012

Most voters continue to believe the federal government does not have the authority to force people to buy health insurance, and they expect the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn President Obama’s health care law that includes that mandate.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters would like to see the Supreme Court overturn the health care law, and 54% predict that that’s what the court will do.

Thirty-seven percent (37%) would like to see the high court uphold the legality of the law, but just 26% think that’s what the court will ultimately decide. Thirteen percent (13%) are undecided about the law, and 21% aren’t sure what the Supreme Court will do about it.


54% Expect U.S. Supreme Court To Overturn Health Care Law - Rasmussen Reports™