My brain has been into legalese mode all day, so it's probably a little bit warped right now, but I'm going to disagree, at least in part. While the decision is not what I expected or wanted, there is a silver lining in it.

First, the Court affirmed that there is, indeed, limits on what the feds can do under either the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause. After the awful decisions in Wickard, Raich and Kelo, this is indeed a victory, albeit a limited one. But it's something to build on.

Secondly, the fact that ObamaCare was upheld by proclaiming the penalty a tax was a good thing on a few counts. It gives our side political fodder to work with. It's far easier politically to get rid of a tax than it is to explain to the electorate what the Commerce Clause is. (As I explained in another post, it can even be done in "reconciliation," where the senate filibuster rules don't apply.)

Thirdly, as George Mason law professor Ilya Somin pointed out, there is even a question as to whether the tax itself is constitutional . This may well be revisited in a couple years.

And fourth, little attention has been paid today on the fact the Medicaid penalty provision on the states was overturned. While it's not yet clear--at least to me--what effect this will eventually have, it does at least give a nod to the Tenth Amendment. There are indeed some victories in this decision.

Is a bloody revolution inevitable? I don't think so. An economic collapse is certainly looking more and more likely, and while that would be unpleasant and not without casualties, it probably won't be anything like a Civil War. I think it will be more like the collapse of the USSR.

But, as I said earlier, my ESP is notoriously awful. So keep your powder dry.

Onward and upward,
airforce