Could June Become A Devastating Month for Obama? UPDATED

For those of us who fought with everything we had against the liberty-robbing, healthcare-destroying and economy-killing piece of garbage popularly known as Obamacare, waiting for the Supreme Court to render its decision this month is nerve-wracking, to put it mildly.

And according to this New York Times CBS News poll, we comprise a majority of the country because more than two-thirds of Americans are hoping the SCOTUS will strike down all or part of the law:

More than two-thirds of Americans hope the Supreme Court will overturn some or all of the 2010 health care law, according to a new poll conducted by The New York Times and CBS News. Just 24 percent said they hoped the court “would keep the entire health care law in place.”

The Supreme Court is expected to decide a challenge to the law by the end of this month.

Forty-one percent of those surveyed said the court should strike down the entire law, and another 27 percent said the justices should overturn only the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty.

These numbers have not changed much in recent months and appeared to be largely unaffected by the more than six hours of arguments in the Supreme Court in March.

There was greater Republican opposition to the law than Democratic support. About two-thirds of Republicans in the recent survey said the entire law should be overturned, while 43 percent of Democrats said all of the law should be upheld.

More than 70 percent of independent voters said they wanted to see some or all of the law struck down, with a majority saying they hoped to see the whole law overturned. Twenty-two percent of independents said they hoped the entire law would survive.

Responses varied by education, too. Nearly a third of respondents with a college education said they would like to see the law upheld, compared with about 20 percent of those without a college degree.

Well if Supreme Court decisions were based on purely on public sentiment, I’d feel a whole lot better right now — at least in this particular case. Fortunately their job is to decide on the constitutionality of laws and this one is certainly a glaring violation. If not completely overturned, we’re in for a very rude awakening which includes the deaths of both patients and medical innovation as reported by Forbes yesterday:

My colleague Robert Book has written a compelling analysis of Obamacare’s medical-device tax, which concludes that it will destroy about 14,000 and perhaps up to 47,100 jobs. The 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices is a savage blow to innovation. Note that this tax is on sales, not profits. It cuts into the top line, not the bottom line. If not repealed, this tax will start hitting medical-device makers on January 1, 2013.

Another colleague, Benjamin Zycher, has come at the tax from a different angle: In an analysis that concludes that the tax will lead to a reduction in research and development by about $2 billion every year, Zycher estimates how many patients will suffer early deaths because of the throttling of innovation.

Reviewing peer-reviewed literature on the relationship between medical technology and improvements in life expectancies, Zycher estimates that the knock-on effect of the tax will be about one million life-years lost annually. (Due to limitations in applying the literature, it not possible to tell the degree to which this tilts towards one million people dying one year earlier, or a smaller number of people dying many years earlier. My own interpretation leans towards the latter.)

Read the whole thing. And if you’re a person of faith, a few prayers for the Supreme Court to do the right thing and simultaneously deal a crushing blow to Dear Leader immediately following Wisconsin’s excellent results the other night would definitely help. For the sake of American ingenuity, prosperity and quality of patient care, nothing less than full repeal is acceptable.

 

UPDATE: Via Twitchy, the NRCC steps up social media fight against Obamacare with petition, web-cam and tweeting printer. Sign the petition today!

Share

ACLJ Steps Up To Defend Conservative Bloggers Against Brett Kimberlin

On the heels of Senator Saxby Chambliss demanding an inquiry from the DOJ about Brett Kimberlin comes another very promising development.

Michelle Malkin reports the good news:

I’ve been telling you about First Amendment lawyers working behind the scenes to help the targets of Brett Kimberlin and his online cabal.
Kudos to the ACLJ for stepping up to the plate in the face of ongoing threats and smears. Just released:

IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 7, 2012

ACLJ DEFENDS FREE SPEECH IN BLOGOSPHERE – REPRESENTING TOP CONSERVATIVE BLOGGERS TARGETED FOR HARASSMENT

(Washington, DC) – The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which focuses on constitutional law, announced today it is providing legal representation to a top conservative blogger and his organization that represents hundreds of bloggers who are facing threats and intimidation tactics by those opposed to their viewpoint.
“Free speech is under attack,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. “Conservative writers are now facing threats against themselves, their families, and their livelihoods merely because they’ve aggressively investigated the history and funding of radical liberals. The ACLJ has a long history of successfully defending free speech, and we look forward to defeating this latest attempt to threaten and intimidate conservatives into silence.”

The issue involves targeting a number of conservative bloggers with a dangerous and illegal tactic that’s become known as SWAT-ing (making false 911 calls sending police to the homes of bloggers, claiming a crime has occurred.) The tactic is used in retaliation for posts the conservative bloggers have written.

The ACLJ is representing Ali Akbar, a top blogger and president of the National Bloggers Club, a coalition of 300 conservative bloggers who reach millions of readers. Akbar has seen his mother’s home photographed and placed on the internet. He has also received formal notification that he may soon be sued for publishing truthful information about radical liberals and their wealthy donors.
“I’m grateful for the support of the ACLJ, and I’m confident we’ll defeat any and all legal challenges to our fundamental right to free speech,” said Akbar. “We will not be deterred in our quest for the truth.”

The ACLJ will aggressively defend the constitutionally-protected free speech rights of Akbar and his organizations.

The ACLJ’s representation of Akbar comes as Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) is calling on Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the SWAT-ting cases to see if federal laws have been violated. In a letter to the Attorney General, Sen. Chambliss wrote: “Any potentially criminal action that incites fear, seeks to silence a dissenting opinion, and collaterally wastes the resources of law enforcement should be given close scrutiny at all levels. . . Regardless of any potential political differences that may exist, threats and intimidation have no place in our national political discourse.”

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice is based in Washington, D.C. and online at www.aclj.org.

Jay’s blog post is here.

More at The Other McCain, who while blogging from an undisclosed location thanks to Kimberlin and his lefty cohorts wonders why CNN is disinterested in the story, even though one of their on-air personalities is himself a victim of Kimberlin’s thuggery:

FROM AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATION

Very busy today, awaiting developments on The Kimberlin Files. However, Da Tech Guy cleverly points out that CNN allowed Arlette Saenz of ABC to beat them on reporting this story, even though the reported SWATting of CNN on-air personality Erick Erickson was a central element of the story.

For that matter, CNN contributorDana Loesch is well-informed about the Kimberlin story, and could put CNN’s reporters in direct contact with many others who are involved. But maybe the executives at CNN would rather continue being No. 3 in cable news ratings, and let their competitors scoop them on such an important story, because they are more interested in playing politics than reporting the actual news.

Jeff Goldstein mocks Brett Kimberlin’s self-proclaimed victimhood.

Obviously, having spoken to Saenz about my own role in the story, I oweThe American Spectator a follow-up on my May 29 article, “Terror By Any Other Name.” So . . .busy day.

Read it all at The Other McCain.

So great to see these bloggers getting the representation they deserve and this story gaining widespread attention. Lefty thugs picked this fight and champions of free speech are going to finish it.

Share