Supreme Court ruling regarding the health care bill
Post-mortem America: Proximate cause of death
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
Tune to any television or talk radio program, or visit any website driven by political agendas and you will find self-styled experts and pundits making predictions about the Supreme Court ruling regarding the health care bill. Their predictions are primarily based on the questions posed by the justices. While the legal disposition of this issue is arguably the most important in the history of our republic and the attention is well deserved, real world experience and three dimensional thinking appears to be mostly absent from the analysis.
Those who are basing their predictions on the questions posed by the judges obviously lack real-world experience. Having occupied seats in numerous courtrooms in many venues, I would never attempt to predict rulings based on questions posed by judges or juries. While juries are unpredictable, judges often ask questions to trigger discussion or open debate. I’ve seen judges who appeared to take an adversarial approach to a certain aspect or element of a case and later rule in favor of that which they appeared to have a certain bias against. I suspect that the vast majority of seasoned lawyers would agree.
Yet, an article written by David Savage appeared in The Los Angeles Times yesterday titled “Justices poised to strike down entire healthcare law.” The author’s premise was based on the questions raised in open court by Judges Scalia and Kennedy, suggesting that they have all but formalized their ruling against the constitutionality of the matter.
But wait, socialists and progressives, it might be premature to be rending your garments. And hold on, all you conservatives, premature celebration could be embarrassing.
Real-world experience dictates that it would be a sophomoric mistake to even attempt to predict the outcome of any case, including one before the highest court in the U.S., based on questions in open court. But that’s mere thought candy - the trappings of an intellectually challenged media - or perhaps evidence of their complicity in the destruction of our country by failing to expose the core issue that few Americans appear to comprehend.
As Americans, we were given a tremendous gift by our founding fathers; a Republic, if we can keep it, to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin. Have we, the people, become so intellectually hobbled that we are unable to understand that this case is not about health care at all?
The health care bill is not now and never has been about health care, but about the systematic dismantling of our constitutional republic through unprecedented control
The health care bill is not now and never has been about health care, but about the systematic dismantling of our constitutional republic through unprecedented control. It has been in progress for decades, yet few have had the guts, will, or capacity to stand up and expose the agenda and people behind it. Anyone who dared to expose the agenda, identify the individuals or even hint at the objectives in play has been publicly mocked, ridiculed, marginalized and muzzled by both sides of the fictitious two-party divide, conservatives and progressives alike.
The same conservative constitutional watchdogs who are now transfixed on the Supreme Court’s actions and pending decision on this landmark case fail to realize or admit that we arrived here, compliments of, in part, their failures. Their blind allegiance to one side of a false political paradigm and consequential inaction has facilitated enemies of our republic to destroy us from within.
The decision of the Supreme Court will indeed be pivotal, but arriving at this point was preventable.
If a post-mortem of our constitution is warranted, check your hands for blood stains and the autopsy report for your name. Just make sure that when the death certificate is posted online, it is genuine. If not, just ignore it, treat it as a fringe issue, and mock anyone who dares speak up.
You know, just stay the course.