Press: Supreme Court unmasks brain-dead party

[Judi Lynn]

Bill Press, opinion contributor 20 hrs ago

In a stunning decision last week, the Supreme Court ripped the mask off the Republican Party. According to the nation's highest court, the party no longer has anything to offer the American people.

Of course, the Supreme Court didn't say that directly, but that's the indisputable meaning of their ruling to uphold the Affordable Care Act. Seven justices - including two appointed by Donald Trump - rejected, for the third time, a Republican Party attempt to overturn the public health plan passed by Congress in October 2009.

Read between the lines of their decision. In effect, the Supreme Court told Republicans: Look, get serious. ObamaCare's been around for almost 12 years now. You promised to "repeal and replace" it with something better, yet never came up with a plan of your own. You voted to repeal it 54 times in the House, but never got enough votes in the Senate. This is the third time you begged the Supreme Court to kill it for you, but couldn't even convince your fellow conservatives to do so. In the meantime, the Affordable Care Act's more popular than ever - and 31 million Americans have now signed up for health care coverage. You lost this battle. It's time to move on.

The problem is, Republicans have nothing to move on to. They're against everything, but for nothing. What was once correctly known as "the party of ideas" has completely run out of ideas. Even when they were in control of the House and Senate, Republicans did not come up with one single plan to deal with any of the major challenges facing this country: not on health care, climate change, economic injustice, cybersecurity or anything else.

More:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/press-supreme-court-unmasks-brain-dead-party/ar-AALjakx?li=BBnb7Kz

[sprinkleeninow]

1. "They're AGAINST everything, but FOR nothing."

There it is.

[cstanleytech]

3. Not true...the Senate and House Republicans never waffle on being only for themselves. nt

[sprinkleeninow]

7. I knew that would come out. Afterthought post my post.

That's precisely what they are for.

[bucolic_frolic]

2. I would argue they're for exploitation, pollution, fear, family values coercion

So there is a platform there that can be enacted if they steal or maintain power. But they've bet the ranch on power by any means and their ability to lie, cheat, and steal elections. They are playing a very high risk game.

Democrats need to be bold with their ideas. Schumer and Pelosi need to push. As Joe Biden said this spring, basically, you win elections because you have the best ideas. You're not winning elections? Change your ideas and go toe to toe. That's what democracy is about - government for the people by the people. Trite, but the best ideas are most popular and over the long haul win.

Republicans can't even argue they're protecting the country. Even Nixon had his reasons to sell war, peace, strength, prosperity to America.

[cstanleytech]

4. You left out cruelty, pettiness, spitefulness and ignorance as they are for all those.

[oldsoftie]

5. I always asked friends "OK, show me the alternative"

Since "repeal & replace" was always the message, where was 1/2 of that message?
SHOW me the "replace" part. Anything. Just show me a plan.
Nothing

[smb]

8. Alternative

[oldsoftie]

9. HA!

[diverdownjt]

6. I heard it put best by Rachael last night...

The Republican Party is "Post-policy" now. They have no interest in governing only ruling from the top down.
If you didn't see her show last night then I just know who you are anymore. Go watch it now...
I can't remember her guest's name but it was really informative.

[Grumpy Old Guy]

10. I worked with Bill Press back in the 80s.

He has always been spot on with his analysis.

[Sam1]

11. The court did not uphold the Affordable Care Act.

The court dismissed the case on grounds the the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the case. The question that the court was going to decide is still open and awaiting plaintiffs with standing to ask for a decision. In effect the court chickened out. They did not want to rule in favor of the act and did not want to appear as what the are just another partisan branch of government. At least, however, they didn't send Dred Scott back with Sanford!