There was a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth by the fringe leftists infesting our state when McKenna joined the lawsuit to toss the obvious-to-even-a-lay-man-like-me lawsuit to toss out the myriad of unconstitutional elements of the unread-before-voting-on Obamacare socialist medicine bill.
Here's some quotes to remind us... ironic in that some of them are from lawyers like our former Attorney General/Now governor who SHOULD have known better.
So, even though Obamacare was obviously unconstitutional, "he doesn't represent" you?
Monday, March 22, 2010 at 3:11 PM,
34 Comments and 9 Reactions
Gov. Gregoire released an official statement later in the day:
“I’m disappointed that the Attorney General would participate in a lawsuit to repeal a law that would help 1.5 million Washingtonians get access to affordable, quality health care.
“I completely disagree with the Attorney General’s decision and he does not represent me.
“He doesn’t represent the people of Washington who would get assistance so they could afford quality health insurance. He doesn’t represent the thousands of small businesses that would benefit from tax credits to provide coverage for their employees. He doesn’t represent the thousands who will no longer be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. He doesn’t represent the half million young people in our state who would be covered under their parents plan until they are 26. He doesn’t represent our state’s Medicare recipients. He doesn’t represent the taxpayers of Washington.
Well, he damned sure represents me... and everyone else who doesn't view the Constitution as a roll of paper you use in the powder room.
Have you thought about turning in your license to practice law since it seems you don't know what the hell you're talking about?
Joel Connelly, The Seattle PI's fringe left nutter blabbed:
Time for that clown to resign and his students should get a refund.
Stewart Jay, the University of Washington law professor and constitutional expert, has this to say about Attorney General Rob McKenna's lawsuit over the new federal health care law: "If it's not frivolous, it's close to frivolous."
"Unless the U.S. Supreme Court is willing to fundamentally change the way constitutional law has been interpreted for the last seven decades, the lawsuit has no merit. By that I mean that this kind of program - which is essentially a taxing and spending program - this kind of program has been consistently upheld since 1937," Jay said in an interview Monday.
And then we can add one of the dimmer bulbs in leftist government, Jay Inslee.
Well, Inslee's either a liar or he consulted legal "experts" bagging his clothing purchases at WalMart.
Liz JonesCongressman Jay Inslee has joined the chorus of Washington State Democrats who are blasting the Attorney General's health care lawsuit. KUOW's Liz Jones reports.
Washington's Attorney General, Republican Rob McKenna, is one of 13 state attorneys general who sued the federal government today. They claim the landmark
health care overhaul is unconstitutional.
Inslee says the lawsuit is not a surprise.
Inslee: "This is exactly what went on when we passed Medicare. They argued that it was unconstitutional. They argued that it was going to destroy the basic fabric of the country. And they lost."
Inlee says he's talked with several constitutional lawyers and is confident the lawsuit will fail.
McKenna says the goal isn't to overturn the full legislation, just the parts he considers unconstitutional. Mainly, the part that requires people to buy health insurance.
And now we can get a glimpse at why Bush fired John McKay: He doesn't know any more about the law than he does tuning fuel injection.
Will those and other slimeballs like them now hurry to the media to explain how wrong they were and to apologize?By
Former U.S. Attorney John McKay says Attorney General Rob McKenna's lawsuit challenging the health care reform bill has no legal standing.
During a formal debate on the issue at the University of Washington Tuesday night, McKay said the suit is entirely political.
"These are policy questions and they're political debate. Perhaps the filing of these cases is not such a pure exercise and the fact that it's not going to go so quickly might not concern some of those who filed it." McKay said.
Fat chance. Because to scum like this, if it's a policy they like?
Then they don't give a rats ass if it's Constitutional or not.
And it's not. And the left knew it.
And they didn't care.
And my guess is these and the rest of the political swine will now be silent. Because the issue of standing and merit has been decided, no matter how this turns out.
But when even someone of my limited training knows this law is unconstitutional, what's the excuse of leftists above to whine that it isn't?