Democrats are now changing their tune, after alleging that Republicans are unfoundedly opposing Obama’s health care legislation for past three years. After three days of oral arguments at the Supreme Court over the president's signature legislation, leading Democratic strategists are now saying that if Obamacare gets overturned it will be an advantage for the Democrat party. Others are saying if the healthcare mandate is deemed unconstitutional it will be because of judicial activism.
Democrats have claimed for years that Republicans are only opposing the universal health care because they are racist, obstructionist, and 'the party of No', now they are working to illegitimize the Supreme Court, in case the verdict on the healthcare legislation doesn't go their way.
Liberals were shocked that the Supreme Court might actually invalidate all or part of Obamacare immediately after the oral arguments concluded, as if the thought had never crossed their minds. Liberal bloggers were fuming after Solicitor General Donald Verrilli's appearance before the high court on Tuesday, calling his arguments a “spectacular flameout,” “unfortunate” and a “choke." Verrilli was “not at the top of his game today,” added MSNBC host Rachel Maddow on her blog, “the word ‘choke’ is being bandied around a bit.” CNN's Jeffrey Toobin called Obamacare a "trainwreck".
President Obama, in his first comments on the court's historic oral arguments last week, cautioned the Supreme Court against overturning his landmark health care law Monday said a decision to reverse the actions of Congress would be “judicial activism” which conservatives usually oppose.
"I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," the President said. "And I'd just remind conservative commentators that for years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example. And I'm pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step."
Van Jones, who served in the Obama administration as an environmental adviser and Sen. Chuck Schumer also claim that the strike down of Obama care would be only because of activist judges. (Since when are Democrats against judicial activism?)
"Should the Supreme Court overturn this law, it would be so far out of the mainstream that the Court would be the most activist in a century," Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said.
Veteran Democratic strategist James Carville said Tuesday that overturning President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform law would actually be a political boost for Democrats.
“I think that this will be the best thing that ever happen to the Democratic party, because health care costs are gonna escalate unbelievably,” Carville told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer of a possible Supreme Court decision to strike down the law. “I honestly believe this, this is not spin “You know what the Democrats are going to say - and it is completely justified: ‘We tried, we did something, go see a 5-4 Supreme Court majority,’” Carville added. “The public has these guys figured out. Our polls show that half think this whole thing is political.”
The Supreme Court, by agreeing to hear challenges to President Obama’s 2010 health care law, set the stage for a decision probably in June and in the midst of the presidential campaign.
Democrats may not know if Obamacare is constitutional or not becaues they passed the 2,700-plus-page bill without reading it. Nancy Pelosi's reassured us in 2010 , "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog controversy."