It’s pretty clear that the idea of “objectivity” is no longer relevant to the Supreme Court and that gender and race are now more important then personal worth.
As someone who feverishly opposes Obama’s brazen attempts to have the government take over all of our industries, I want to make sure that the message we send to those we are trying to convince is correct.
There were “ok” arguments when the gov took over car companies, since the gov. gave them so much money.
There were slightly plausible arguments when the gov took over the banks, because they wanted to add regulations to prevent another meltdown.
There are NO good arguments for letting the gov. control your healthcare. Say it’s a liberal in charge (far fetched, I know), then what? What decisions can they dictate? Free abortions? No priests allowed in hospitals to visit the sick and give last rights?
There were “ok” arguments when the gov took over car companies, since the gov. gave them so much money.
There were slightly plausible arguments when the gov took over the banks, because they wanted to add regulations to prevent another meltdown.
There are NO good arguments for letting the gov. control your healthcare. Say it’s a liberal in charge (far fetched, I know), then what? What decisions can they dictate? Free abortions? No priests allowed in hospitals to visit the sick and give last rights?
You know what the most upsetting thing about this is? Most of us aren’t even accusing him of ANYTHING. It’s a simple request to see a simple document.
But the controversy really should be his inability to provide the document, not our reaction to it. And that’s the narrative the msm is spreading and a lot of people on the right (I’m looking at you, NRO, Coulter, etc) are buying into it.
Conservatives sold out our fiscal principles over the last 8 years, and it’s been hell trying to get those back. Let’s not sell out our legal principles now.