A recent Washington Times article posed a critical question: will the Republicans choose the Constitution or the money?
The Republican Party has been ravaged by an internecine battle fought between the forces of "conservatism" on one side and "constitutionalism" on the other. These former tent mates have come out in open antagonism against each other with the control of the GOP as the spoils promised to the winner.
San Francisco, California, is a city known for being a bastion of all things progressive, secular, countercultural and counter-traditional. Ever since the Hippie Movement of the 1960s took root in the city, various liberal policies have been enacted, including some of America’s first laws pandering to the homosexual community (hate crimes legislation, “non-discrimination” policies, etc.), abortion advocates (such as laws imposing heavy fines on pro-lifers who protest outside clinics), and even laws pandering to the animal rights and public health lobbies (such as policies restricting fast food restaurants from marketing to children).
When President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid saw to the passage of ObamaCare in March 2010, they feigned excitement over the supposed benefits that were to befall the American people. As time passed following the law’s passage, however, it became evident that the law was not all it was touted to be, and a massive amount of waivers were handed out to those well-connected enough to secure them from the Obama administration. The latest group to receive a waiver is a company that was ironically one of the biggest cheerleaders of the healthcare legislation at the time of its passage: the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP).
Sen. Bernard Sanders was obviously correct when he stated recently that the citizens of his home state of Vermont believe healthcare is a right. At least enough of them believe it to convince their state legislature and governor to make socialized medicine the law of the land.