Republican Rob McKenna - Washington State AG - appears to be dusting off his right wing credentials in preparation for a probable run for Washington governor in the next state election cycle. He is a fairly smart guy and probably knows as well as anybody that the Florida case he has joined is BS but the timing on this works pretty well for him and his early local fundraising efforts.

There's a deeper issue. If I were an officer of the court, and brought a major frivolous lawsuit, I would be in hot water. We're stretching our corporate fascism to the point that we're trying to roll back Magna Carta level protections. This is simply a case of the head law enforcement official acting as though they were above the law.

If Obama were a progressive, he would have had Holder draft new policy and proceedures for the AG's office that would explicitly criminlize Gonzales' kind of behavior. A fish rots from the head down, and I think at least 50% of their behavior is looking at the egregious misuse of the office under him, and that they were pretty much able to do what they wanted, with impunity.

Ignorance is no excuse of the law- unless you're an Attorney General!

HAHAHA!

You know what will be more fun than blocking this steaming pile of crap healthcare bill?

Will be seeing it torn to shreds by the courts and outraged voters.

Funny thing joe hack, as the public learns what is actually in the bill, public support is growing.

This frivolous lawsuit has nothing to do with enforcing the law, and everything to do with helping various scumbag Republican AGs increase their political appeal to the crazies in their party - which is basically most of them.

Previous comment was following on from that, with addition.

They really seem to think that they are above the laws that they enforce. Hence the reference to Magna Carta.

And the next time someone asks why no one ever "connects the dots", consider that its because it is generally met with "say what...we was talkin' about sumthin' diffrunt". Or worse.

Let's hope John Kitzhaber gets elected governor and uses his years of experience and insight as head of the Archimedes Movement to enact fundamental health reform in Oregon - The federal plan opens the door to what can be an improved, sustainable system in this state. Oregonians should not bind themselves to mediocrity.

There's really no true opt-out. It's still a mandate, because state's would have to meet federal requirements. I don't think it's a matter of these states not reading the bill, it's a matter of true philosophical differences, and some believing the feds can't force healthcare at any level.

Sam Stein makes an ass of himself (again). And Kari, you may be an ignorant fool, but your problem is that some of us can prove you are.

It's laughable that anyone would listen to, much less repeat, anything a sleazy, lying, politician like Wyden says:

1) The mandate is on individuals, not states, so there is no actionable state interest for AGs to defend. 2) An individual has no power to establish a state system, or apply for a waiver. 3) AG's have no power to cause a state to enact a health care system. 4) A waiver is at the discretion of the Feds, not the individual, state AG, or the state. 6) AG's do have the power to represent the people of their state against an unconstitutional Federal mandate on individuals.

So basically Ron Wyden is either an ignorant fool, as the above demonstrates, and he did fail the bar repeatedly, or his just an arrogant, dishonest, scumbag.

The question is whether Kari is that ignorant. Or if he really is just so absolutely psychologically pathological that he has no problem humiliating himself by repeating such stupidity, either just to shill for his dishonest clients, or worse because he wants them to like him.

Funny thing joe hack, as the public learns what is actually in the bill, public support is growing.

And mp97303: In fact, you are wrong and your comment is dishonest. The public doesn't know what is in the bill. The only poll that has been take was right after passage, and even up till today, there has not been a full and accurate explanation of the actually specifics of the bill in the media. Only generalities that misrepresent the actually specifics of the bill. And the pollsters have not asked people to state what is in the bill to prove they know before asking whether they support it.

Just for the record, Mark Hall doesn't have the slightest idea what he is writing about. Both United States v. Lopez and United States v. Morrison are the open grave that the individual mandate is going to be dumped into.

Merely existing is not "economic activity." Millions of Obama supporters prove this again and again every day by contributing nothing to society.

I'm sorry. Perhaps through some "legal discourse",it is all OK to push the Health Care Reform down the throats of America, and the cowards in State and Federal Office, on both sides of the same coin, have and are using the issue to line their pockets and secure their careers in politics, but as an individual, I find it appalling that I am going to be forced to purchase health insurance, or any product against my will. (Sure, I buy car insurance, but there is no law that says I have to drive). Where are all of the folks that used to say, "Keep your laws off my body"? Without the right to deny consent to the state, there is no liberty.

LesterPester - -"Keep your laws off my body"? Without the right to deny consent to the state, there is no liberty.-

So I guess you would in favor of doing away with the Selective Service and draft registration. Now there's a mandate.

The draft and Selective Service registration are firmly rooted in a Congressional grant of power to raise and maintain an army, hence constitutional.

Fail.

I read that the bill has a religous exception. Allowing people who do not want health care for religious reasons to just opt out. Are we going to get into the business of judging who is religious enough to opt out or if you claim it will it be so. And if a mere claim of religous objection is enough we may have a lot more religous people on the books real soon. I think it will be an interesting seperation issue.

I was just wondering about that Joe. I was thinking about Seventh Day Adventists, who can legally refuse medical treatment. Just Wednesday, I asked, "are they going to be forced to carry medical coverage for care they will refuse?"

That fact the exemption is there shows that the religious right are very well represented in Congress. I know enough theology to fake it. May end up becoming a JW or 7th day-er.

Let that sink in a moment. We have a religion based on a typographical error, that is tax exempt, and had better representation on this in the Congress than the public option did. This country has a lot of problems, and right wing religion is at the heart of every one.