September 28, 2011

Sarah Palin Answered The Question – But No One Understood Her Answer

They’re at different ends of the totem pole. At one end, last night, the Republican savior Chris Christie, demanded all the media attention, as he announced once again that he will not run for president. And at the other end, Sarah Palin, the Republican shipwreck and her feeble attempt to keep the Fox spotlight on herself one more time, trying to fool the last six of her last remaining followers into thinking that she may…or may not run for president in 2012.

The host of On The Record asked about a possible Palin candidacy in 2012 and off-camera, the interpreters tried to decode the words falling from Palin’s mouth;

“Through my process of decision-making with my family and my close friends as to whether I should throw my name in the hat for the GOP nomination for 2012 – Is a title worth it? Does a title shackle a person?” Palin said Tuesday night on the Fox News show “On the Record.”

“Someone like me who’s a maverick? I do go rogue and I call it like I see it and I don’t mind stirring it up in order to get people to think and debate aggressively to find solutions to the problems that our country is facing,” Palin continued.

“Somebody like me, is a title and a campaign too shackling? Does that prohibit me from being out there and out of a box, not allowing handlers to shape me and to force my message to be what’s going on, or what contributors or political pundits want it to be?”

Head scratching, with raised eyebrows everywhere.

Next Stop For Health Care Law – The U.S Supreme Court

In a move some are describing as pure confidence, the Obama Administration has allowed the September 25th deadline to pass without filing their appeal to the 11th Circuit Court, in the ongoing battle by Republicans to repeal the President’s Health Care Law. Republicans have claimed that the individual mandate in the law is “unconstitutional.”

Former acting Solicitor General Walter Dellinger, who supports the law, told Politico that this move to allow the case to be heard now by the Supreme Court, “confirms what I had already concluded: That the government is confident that it’s going to prevail in the Supreme Court and would like to have a decision sooner rather than later.”

But opponents to the law are looking at this decision differently. Randy E. Barnett, a Georgetown Law professor who is working with the plaintiffs, credits the President for not delaying the case anymore and for sending it to the Supreme Court for their decision in what he refers to as a “constitutional controversy.”

Politico Reports:

The issue of the constitutionality of the individual mandate has been widely expected to be decided by the Supreme Court. The key question has been the timing. The Justice Department’s apparent decision to ask the Supreme Court to review the case greatly increases the chances the issue will be heard in the 2011-12 term, which begins Monday.

The Supreme Court now has several strong reasons to accept the case. The court rarely declines requests from the government to take a case, especially in situations in which a circuit court has struck down a piece of a high-profile law.

The current political make-up of the Supreme Court is 5 to 4 in favor of the Republicans/Conservatives. In a perfect world, one would expect these justices to strictly adhere to the rule of law and judicial precedent. But this particular court is an activist court, implementing decisions that benefit their political party’s ideology over the rule of law.

Expect justice to eventually prevail, but with the current political occupants of this Court, justice will be delayed then detoured until the new occupants move in.

For more on this story, click here.