Too bad. She really missed an opportunity to scold the Obama Machine on the fact that this plan is unconstitutional. They can’t make a law for some people and not others. Period. Fourteenth Amendment.
Instead she recommends that union membership call their leadership. Yeah, there’s a plan that is sure to work.
I like Sarah as much as everyone else here, but sometimes she just misses the deeper view.
She already said on Glenn Beck’s program the Health Care bill is unconstitutional
She just said two days ago that the entire obamacare and the backdoor dealing and wheeling is unconstitutional!!
Perhaps she’s not the one missing the deeper view here. What Sarah is doing here is starting to rebuild Ronald Reagan’s coalition. She’s calling the Reagan Democrats to come back into the fold.
She doesn’t want to slam the Obama admin too hard in this kind of post, because many of the people she is appealing to here voted for him. Now they may have buyers’ remorse, but hitting Obama too hard in this kind of appeal could be seen by the people it is designed for as an attack on *them*
She has, and will continue to, pick Obama apart in many posts. This just isn’t one in which it works to her advantage.
The big picture here is one of Reagan’s coalition rebuilding, and she has her eyes focused on the prize.
- JP
There were a few other responses and I tend to agree with them. In once instance she plainly said that it was unconstitutional. Here, she just says unfair.
I think that the difference is in the audience. The first audience was mostly conservative and relates well with constitutionality. The second was a more general audience and fairness is something that they can more easily relate to.