Still chewing up my NFIB v Sabelius stuff.  But to keep you happy , hare are three "silver linings" from the case as observed by Tim Dalrymple.

1.  the long term effect will be rather to narrow — not legally but practically and actually — the sphere of government power.  First of all, placing the ACA under the Taxation power instead of the Commerce power places greater limits on how that power can be used and dramatically softens the penalty for non-compliance (you simply pay a tax, you cannot be jailed or otherwise punished for failure to purchase health insurance).  Congress cannot compel you to purchase insurance; it can only compel you to pay a non-extreme, non-coercive tax if you wish not to purchase insurance.  Second, by laying waste to the Commerce Clause argument and making clear that this sort of thing can only be done through the taxation power, the decision may make it harder to pass these sorts of laws in the first place.  You cannot hide in the subterfuge of the Commerce Clause — or, if you try, everyone will say, “No, we know better now, this is and must be a tax.”

2.  By placing the ACA under the umbrella of the tax power, Roberts may have made the ACA easier to overturn by several orders of magnitude.  The ordinary process, of course, requires 60 votes to overcome a filibuster in the Senate.  But when it concerns budgetary matters, including taxes (like the Bush tax cuts), 51 votes are sufficient to put the law on hold for 10 years.

3.  The importance of the ruling on states and Medicaid should not be lost in all of this.  The administration’s claim that it could remove all medicaid funding for the states that refused to expand medicaid in the way the administration wants was rejected.  The administration can condition new, additional funding on states’ cooperation, but not the preexisting funding.  This is a big difference.  It will be much easier for states to opt out of the medicaid expansion. (which is happening!)

I've voted in nine Presidential elections.  Only once has the candidate I voted for one.  When the Donks whined about changing the rules after 2000 I had some second thoughts.  I don't think Ohio will be the difference this year either.  PA will be. 

And then Timothy Egan from the NYT goes and writed this: 

"Tribes of the Swing States," began with an intriguing rundown of what Obama and Romney have in common, before swerving into ridiculously self-righteous liberalism.

"But Romney has a longer list of people who may be disinclined to vote for him. Latinos. Gays. Gay soldiers. People who were bullied as kids. Dog lovers. People who like sex. People who use contraception during sex. People who want “free stuff,” as Romney classified those without health care on Wednesday. People who believe in science."

I was bullied as a kid and refuse to let the Obama Administration do it to me as an adult.  I love dogs.  I like sex.  I've used contraception during sex.  I believe in science.  This guy is so wrong in so many ways.

 “One candidate put his money in Swiss banks. One candidate puts my money in Greek economics.”

Fewer workers and their tax payments have to support more and more Medicaid recipients.

2. The number of takers is now approaching the number of makers.

3. Medicaid and other welfare enrollment has exploded.

4. Medicaid enrollment is growing faster than economy.

5. Medicaid spending? You ain’t seen nothing yet.

6. Disability enrollees have exploded and are rising faster than job creation.

National Democrats have repeatedly touted their stand against taking corporate money for their convention in September, and so it was striking to see two emails from the DNC host committee referring to the Charlotte venue where President Obama will speak as [sic] "Panthers Stadium."

Bank of America would probably rather not be associated with President Somebody Did It For You anyway.

If Bush had said this .... also relates to issues with NFIB v Sebelius ... and the raging ignorance of the POTUS as exacerbated by the media.

Given recent comments he made from the White House, Obama's not much of a student of History, or human rights, either. "In his remarks, Obama suggested that the Declaration (of Independence) was the first time the God-given rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness had been 'put to paper."'

As it's primary author, Thomas Jefferson, acknowledged, the Declaration was never intended to be based upon original thinking ... or writing. It was meant to express the "American mind," developed from and based upon centuries of thinking and writing, all of it well documented and commonly known.

As Jefferson wrote in 1825, "All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c."

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Extra credt ... from an alleged TEACHER OF CON LAW: "It turns out the founding fathers designed a system that makes it more difficult to bring about change than I would like." Barak Hussein Obama - 2012.

Ed Driscoll notes an interesting AP “news” “report” by Donna Cassata complaining that “conservatives make it rough for business“.  And she types, allegedly with a straight face "They and their ideological leaders argue that the marketplace should dictate what businesses thrive and falter, not Washington."

Well ... duh!

WAPO POLL: 54% Disapprove of Obama’s Handling of Economy.

Not a big deal, right?  But Of respondents only 24% call themselves Republicans, with a full 60% listed as Democrat or independent.  Last time the Republicans were under 25% of the electorate, there were Whigs!  The numbers are MUCH worse if the filter s adjusted.

As some of you know, my in-laws are retired.  He worked for a textbook publishing company (VP of the Science Division) and she was a HS Spanish teacher.  They saved and invested and now have a significant nest egg on which to enjoy a long and happy retirement.  And they've shared it with their children and grandchildren.  As a result I've been a beneficiary of their largess...to the tune of six figures.  And al the guilt that goes along with that.  But this weekend I was letoff the hook.

They're big Obama supporters.  So this w/e when the POTUS uttered his money lines: “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” and Obama To Americans: You Don’t Deserve What You’ve Earned! “ (observation: Americans to Obama: “Funny, we were thinking the exact same thing about you…”)

So here's the deal - the moey they worked for and scrimped and saved - isn't theirs.  It's the Gubmints.  So whe they give it to me it's just that "redistribution" Obama's always talking about.  

So no more guilt.