it is unconstitutional. there s no where in the constitution the government can force you just because you breathe to buy a product or service because government tells you to. that is the height of or that s the bottom of the barrel of not having freedom. so i see under no circumstance the supreme court could call that constitutional. and if it happens, what would you be saying to me tomorrow night if indeed you are wrong and they say it is constitutional? greta, i m sorry go ahead. what i would be saying to you tomorrow night is next. that s why elections matter and that s why all of our chips are on november. and why we have to replace the president, the senate, and make sure that we have a house that will fully repeal obamacare. that hasn t changed for us. we are fully committed to the repeal of obamacare. is there any chance in your mind that the supreme court would simply declare the man date unconstitutional and leave the rest of the law standing? because frankly i do
sunday that rom nice oo uniquely disqualified to run because of romney care, but he said he would be a vice president. bill: the numbers have doubled and tripled since yesterday. we heard from ron johnson the republican senator of wisconsin last year. he is firmly against this law standing. this hour we want to talk with a physician, a primary care physician in washington. he supports the healthcare law, and a breast cancer survivor who supports the law as well. michael new man is there outside the courthouse and spike ward. can you both hear me. yes, we can hear you. bill: what is your position on this? why do you support it? i support the healthcare laws, the affordable care act because it gives people who otherwise wouldn t have access to affordable medical care. and the story of spike, who i just encountered this morning is illustrative of what the
mccain s running mate has been of course spreading garbage like this for the last couple of years. as the u.s.s. cole was attacked, our embassies were attacked it was treated by an international crime spree not like an act of war. we re seeing that mindset again settle into washington. that scares me for my children, for your children. treating this like a mere law enforcement matter places our country at great risk because that s not how radical islamic extremists are looking at this. they know we re at war and to win that war we need a commander-in-chief not a professor of law standing at the lectern. not a professor of law. we need a commander-in-chief. so, sarah palin, how is this commander-in-chief doing now? palin has just been a small part of the smear job on president obama s national security credentials. the lead attack dog has been former vice president dick cheney.
clear. by the way, no one can shout about judicial activism and look at it and not say it s not the most active you can imagine. you can t be short of anything on the law when you have the supreme court shown in the most important case in history. it is something to take seriously and on the substance, this is not that hard. this is feeling like bush v gore in terms of the size and the political implications. there is a great line where it says i know what a court does is take out the part you don t like. in this case he left the rest of the law standing. i m not going to do it this time, but this is unique. there is a sort of a line that this is unique and don t use it for precedent going forward she highly politicized in the ways where judges go more with their partisan affiliations than
rest of us pay for it. this is about regulating the marketplace. i believe it is clear. no one can shout about judicial activism and not say that is the most activist court you can imagine. you can t be sure of anything on the law when you have a supreme court that has shown in perhaps the most important case in american history that they are prepared to ignore the law. this is not a legal call at heart in my view. this is feeling like bush v. gore in terms of the size of the case. there is a great line where he says listen, i know normally what a court does is you take out the part you don t like. in this case the individual mandate and you leave the rest of the law standing. i m not going do this this time but this is very unique. there is an aligning there. this is a unique case. in these very highly politicized