Bush-Derangement Syndrome

Yesterday I asked my sold-himself-to-the-socialists friend whether or not he's read the current Obamacare bill that came from the House. I knew the answer but it would be entertaining to hear him say, "I'm working on a doctoral thesis and don't have time" right before he tried to defend something his just admitted to not reading. He did use that exact response. Side note, I say in advance, "I'd like to hear you tell me again about how busy doctor school is so I want to ask you a question..." This serves to piss him off as it pretty much takes the bullets out of his chamber before he even reaches for his gun. But, here's what I got out of the conversation. The knee jerk response that American Brown Shirts always employ whenever they're confronted with strong arguments about Obama, Pelosi, et al being wolves dressed as sheep is that it's the legacy of George W. Bush. For the record, I'm not a fan of GWB. He called himself a Republican and a conservative. Truth be known, he's a politician - so he's really an "MGR" which is short for the current one-party system we have in Washington called, "Must Get Re-elected." But, the goose-stepping followers of Neo-Western-Socialism have convinced themselves that they're unaffiliated with his (GWB's) variety of MGR-ism. Not so. Nevertheless, back to my friend. He's burning up my ear about how Obamacare is the least of his worries. In his words, the legacy of the Bush Administration, a phrase I hear him use often, is that at any moment a black SUV could show up in front of his house and in a few hours he would be in a covert CIA interrogation camp in a village in Romania. I simply find that false. My contention is, what good would it be to live in a country where the federal government could, without subpoena, demand, analyze, and make live or death decisions with your private medical records? And that's not even the worst of it! I mean, in this new bill, Uncle Sam gives himself not just the right to trample on the Bill of Rights, as is so often used by the left regarding The Patriot Act. This would go much, much further. It would essentially eliminate something called Judicial Review and throw off balance another thing called Separation of Powers.

Judicial review, for those of you who missed out in civics class, comes from one of the earliest cases to be heard before the Supreme Court: Marbury v. Madison. Without going in to case law history, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) through implication gave the U.S. Federal Courts (and by way of precedent lower courts) the ability to review and uphold or strike down laws which they deemed inconsistent with existing law of a higher status. Without review authority, the appeals courts would in effect lose all of their power and the executive and legislature would be free to do as they please. Obamacare, among its other oddities, seeks to very quietly remove this little feature from the landscape of American juris prudence. How nice.

Second, with the attack on Separation of Power (which says that Congress is only allowed to do Congress things, the executive executes, and the courts make sure everyone follows the rules) our government wants to vest powers of review (see above) in the executive. What does this mean? Think of it like this: One day the king sends a couple of soldiers over to your village to get some produce because the rest of the troops are running low. The soldiers knock on your door and tell you they need all of your corn and two of your four cows. You tell them to pound salt and slam your door. They take your stuff at gun point, they have guns you know, and because you pissed them off, they set your house on fire to teach you and your neighbors a lesson about how to speak with soldiers. Right now you would have a claim in Federal Court and in all likelihood, two things would happen: you'd get money for the corn, the cows, and all of your possessions which were burned (this is called compensatory recovery). You'd also get punitive damages - that is, the court would punish those responsible to prevent others from doing this kind of things ever again. Well, with Obamacare, there would be no judge (sort of). You could bring a case, and it could be heard - by the executive! The very guy who started this whole mess in the first place. Do you think he will somehow come to his senses and rule, "Ya know what, you're right, that was a bad thing for me to do. I'm going to fine myself and pay you a whole bunch of money to make things better - bailiff, bring me the royal check-book!" Nope, not under Obamacare. Like I told my buddy, go read the bill. It's right there. And that my friends, is why if this thing get turned in to law, we're all screwed - unless you happen to work for either the executive or the legislature.