To: RobbyS
The difference is that Massachusetts has the legitimate authority to do such a thing. Congress does not: yet, the Chief Justice has just said they do.
So socialism at the State Level is OK, but not at the Federal level.
What a concept for a conservative to argue for.
28 posted on
07/09/2012 9:24:16 PM PDT by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
To: SoConPubbie
Well, it may be bad policy and still be law. That is why Scalia mentioned slavery in connection with the Arizona case. It may have been bad policy, but even Lincoln acknowledged that a state had a right to institute it.
30 posted on
07/09/2012 9:33:29 PM PDT by
RobbyS
(Christus rex.)
To: SoConPubbie
"So socialism at the State Level is OK, but not at the Federal level. What a concept for a conservative to argue for."Speaking the truth is not the same as arguing for it. A state can do anything allowed in its state constitution. It's the federal government that is limited by the US constitution. That's simply a fact.
35 posted on
07/10/2012 4:54:54 AM PDT by
norwaypinesavage
(Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson