The Case of Broccoli

In the oral arguments before the Supreme Court in the case of Florida v. Department of Health and Human Servs I am hearing about broccoli. Some say it’s a meaningless argument but others seem it makes a good point. What would be the case of Broccoli? Should we have it?

(BTW in looking at the case it states it as Florida v. Department of Health and Human Servs and Department of Health and Human Servs V. Florida in the oral arguments. So was this officially two cases, and we could have two different decisions (i.e. two majority decisions and two descending decisions.)? May be it was just an error.

"I would like to play Supreme Court. I get to be Chief Justice!”

Well I would like to read the oral arguments and listen to them and then write my opinion, I would also work on writing opinions of both sides and see if how I argue it would agree with the final decision.

Supreme Court

I wonder how the Supreme Court makes decisions?

During Ruth Beta Ginsburg's confirmation hearing she was asked “What is the worse Supreme Court case” She had said the case of “Roe V Wade” but she had a better argument for Abortion rights, but would not state what it is in case it is brought up before the Court.

So how much do the oral arguments play in the decisions of the court?If a justice did not think one side may a good case, would they be willing to make the better case in their opinion. If someone would make a bad argument, would that side lose because of the poor argument or will a justices better opnion be used in its place.

If the case is going to be based on the quailty of the oral arguments it would seem the Health Care Reform law would be overturned.

I will try to take sometime to further study of the oral arguments. It would be interesting to be able to create my opinion of the case and examine if how I wrote it would in anyway be close to what is finally presented.

Supreme Court and Health Care.

When the Supreme Court is making decisions, I would hope they would be willing to grant individuals freedom before they would grant greater power to the Federal government. If it is a choice of say, an individual's right to have an abortion or the Federal government being able to exercise greater power to require abortions in certain cases I would hope individual freedom is chosen. The Constitution is to limit the powers of the Federal government to those given to it by the people through the Constitution. If the constitution does not grant the Federal government the authority to do something then it should not be allowed to do it.

If every one but one person or a small minority of people in the United States of America, wanted to band guns, but the constitution was not changed, then the constitution should prevail, and even if strict gun control is in the main stream it should not be the ruling of the court. But they should defend the Constitution even if a small number or even if no one is for the 2^nd amendment.

You may hear at the confirmation hearings of a Supreme Court nominee, someone wanting to make sure he/she is in the 'main stream' but if the 'main stream' is unconstitutional, then don't be main stream. To change the constitution is tough, and it should be. If something is main stream enough it should be easy to alter the confirmation.

So as the Court is considering the Health care Act they should be much harder on the government, than on the plaintiff. If the government has difficulty defending the law, then it should be over turned. It should be a very strong and compelling case for the court to allow a federal mandate to occur.

Lets hope the court protects freedom, and puts down tyranny.

Louisiana

A sign of strength for Romney would be winning Louisiana. If he can win that state, he can soon win enough delegates for the nomination. This will allow him to win Texas.
If he does not win, then he needs to consider on getting a V.P. who is from the south and will do well in debates. Newt will do well in the south but won't be enough to help him. Santorum showed he can win in the south so he could work, but would he be good and debating V.P. Biden? He would need to work a lot to prepare for the debate.

So, assuming Romney get the nomination, here are some options
Rick Santorum
Bobby Jindal
Phil Bryant
Haley Barbour
Robert J. Bentley
Rick Scott
Jeb Bush (Could help get Florida, and attacks about Bush would back fire)
Sam Brownback
Nikki Haley (she is young, would be compared to Sarah Palin and would need to do a lot of prep work, She has to study hard to do ok against Biden.)

Newt Gingrich and The Convention

Well I downloaded the information about the delegate count, and I worked on trying to figure out how could the rest of the contests go. Santorum has to win either Texas or California. I suspect he will be able to win Texas but I don't think he will be able to win California. I wanted to know how would the breakdown be in order for Romney not to come into the convention with enough delegates to win the nomination. Some of the delegates in the past caucuses or primaries have not all been allocated, I tend to be missing a few, so the missing ones could go to Romney and he would win.

If it would be possible for no candidate to have enough votes, it is thought we will have a brokered convention . But I don't think that is what Newt Gingrich wants. I think he would like to be the vice presidential nominee. So if Mitt Romney wants his supporters, he would add Gingrich to the ticket, bringing his delegates over to Romney.

Now I question if it would be possible to be part of the ticket, with out releasing his delegates. It seems like he would have to but would be depending on them to vote for Romney.

Also if Romney rejects the proposal, would Santorum have enough delegates to allow the Gingrich delegates to give Santorum the nomination? I don't think so.

So Newt Gingrich is going to have to use the threat of a broker convention against Romney in order to get the vice president spot on the ballot. But are any of these candidates willing to settle for be the number two?

How about Romney and Santorum put aside their differences, and work together. If they would join forces, it would neuter Newt. Polls need to be done checking on the Romney and Satorum vs President Obama and Vice President Biden race. Could they together, beat President Obama? Maybe.

Don't get out

I don't think any of the Republican Presidential candidates should get out of the race. Each candidate should be expressing their beliefs as much as possible.
They are many states where Santorum could win. Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama but even if Gingrich drops out, it will be difficult for him to get the nomination.
Don't let one person have a Monopoly on the ideas being discussed. By having the future nominee fight for the nomination, it will allow the people to help shape the views of the nominee. The nominee will need the support of everyone who supported them during the race to gain delegates. Each candidate needs to be able to expand their ideas to incorporate the idea of others. It is not enough for the person to expect the people to simply support his ideas, it is important for the nominee to support the ideas of the people.

Too many times in Presidential elections, the candidate presents their beliefs and the people have to pick the lesser of two evils. This needs to be the time the nominee listens to the people and begins articulate what people are feeling, and thinking.
Romney has difficults doing this. Saying that he knows some NASCAR team owners does not help him relate. If he is given the nomination by the others dropping out, he won't mold his ideas into the shape needed.
Santorum calling President Obama a snob does not help. Since he missrepresented the Presidentes words, it makes him look foolish.
Fighting for the Nomination will make the nominee stronger. Extended fights only hurt if it results in the nominee not being able to have money to run.

Looking At the Polls

In looking at some recent polls concerning the Presidential election, I am disappointed by the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll. I would like to have known the reason for the missing percentages. One might assume it represents the undecided but, some could represent those not interested in either candidate. If some of the missing percentage is from people who would not vote for either, it would give each candidate a slight higher percentage.
President Obama could have a number higher than fifty percent. This assumes everyone surveyed (800 people) are planning to vote.

Rush’s Apologizes

When I am at work and a former conservative Rush Limbaugh fan, now very much liberal, brings up something Rush Limbaugh says, he acts surprised. I point out that Rush is not different from how he was twenty years ago when he was listening to Rush. So when Rush apologizes, I am amused by how Rush suggests his comments are not a reflection of how he is. It is not a sincere apology. But if people hear he apologizes, they will tend to assume he will apologize in a manner fitting the definition they have.
Instead he suggested his behavior was how the ‘LEFT’ behaves, and his choice of words was not the best. Saying he was pointing out “absurdity by being absurd”. His apology is about saving his business. It seemed to me in my opinion to be insincere. Done in hopes his advertisers will continue to support his show.
Rush is right about one thing. It’s the audience that is important. When people quite listening to his show, advertisers will quit advertising on his shows. If the audience continues to listen he will find advertisers.

Another thing I would agree with is Rush did not think she is represented by the use of those words. He did NOT fully buy her testimony, and did not believe she was having such an active sex life she could not afford birth control. He suggested what he considered the logical conclusion to be reached if someone needed that much birh control. But don't think his choice of words was somehow beneath him. It was not.