An excerpt of Where They Stand:The American Presidents in the Eyes of Voters and Historians by Robert W. Merry in Salon suggests George W. Bush will be ranked near the bottom of all presidents.

"Based on the contemporaneous voter assessments, the objective record, and what we know of history, it's difficult to see him even in middle-ground territory. History likely will view Bush largely as the voters did after eight years of his stewardship. And so it's probably just as well that he doesn't care much about the verdict of history."

Domenico Montanaro has a must-read piece on how Solicitor General Donald Verrilli won over Chief Justice John Roberts with his arguments over the constitutionality of President Obama's health care law.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll of recent college graduates finds them supporting President Obama over Mitt Romney, 52% to 27%.

Interestingly, 58% said they have "a great deal" or "quite a bit" of interest in the upcoming presidential election. That compares with 62% who went to the polls four years ago.

Republicans say they?re redoubling their efforts to retake the White House and Senate in order to repeal the health law. But at least one Republican thinks it won?t be so easy to get the numbers needed.

A top Obama campaign official said President Barack Obama is open to allowing states to opt out of provisions of the Democrats? health-care overhaul if they find their own ways to achieve its cost and coverage goals.

Early polling suggests repealing the health care law might be less potent than they think.

The Supreme Court Has Spoken

by Darrell L. CastleThe Supreme Court has announced its ruling in regard to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act commonly known as Obamacare. My purpose in this article is to point out that those of us in the Constitution Party endeavor to return America to the rule of law as expressed in the US Constitution. That?s why we carry the name Constitution Party. We also seek to restore a concept fundamental to Western Civilization and that is the understanding between government and citizens that the law applies equally to all. The question for us then is where do we go from here in furtherance of our goals. From a negative standpoint calling Obamacare the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is like calling a new intercontinental ballistic missile the Peacekeeper. The system this act purports to establish is certainly not affordable, at least not by those who will actually pay for it, and it doesn?t offer much patient protection either. The majority opinion takes some interesting twists and turns to arrive at who will pay. For example how do you justify a fine for being unwilling to buy health insurance?just redefine the fine into a tax and everything is OK. In arriving at its justification for placing its stamp of approval on Obamacare the majority stated ?It is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income but choose to go without health insurance.? ?Such legislation is within Congress?s power to tax.? From that statement, one can conclude that it will be those among the 50 per cent who actually pay income taxes and who choose not to buy the insurance, that will be paying the fine, or tax. This twisted logic appears to be a legal fiction created by the Court to escape the failure of the Commerce Clause to expand enough to cover Obamacare.   This is not the end of the Constitution as some have said.  Instead, it is an indication that the Constitution died a while back in the hearts and minds of many of the American people and their leaders.  The Constitution ended when Congress and the American people refused to hold Presidents accountable for their violations of the rule of law. When a Pressident openly announces that the law does not apply to him, and that he is free to make war without consulting Congress, and that he is free to kill or imprison without trial anyone he wants, then the Constitution is dead. The Constitution as the rule of coherent law in America has been replaced by armed force and in the case of Obamacare by armed robbery. If a robber stops you on the street, puts a gun to your head and demands your money, you might give it to him to avoid being shot. When the robber demands your money, you would probably feel no better, no less threatened if he explained that he needed the money for people less fortunate than you or for some other good cause. No, armed robbery is a crime in America unless it is committed by the government and then it?s a tax. The good news is that we are still alive and fighting. We are Like Washington?s rag tag army which was pushed all over the eastern seaboard and Canada for years by the British, winning only a couple of battles.  Ultimately though, it was Cornwallis who surrendered to Washington at Yorktown and not the other way around. The fate of Washington?s army was in the hands of God as is our fate today. There is still plenty of time to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat because President Obama the US Congress, and the Supreme Court have delivered into our hands perhaps the greatest issue we have ever had to campaign on. We in the Constitution Party demand and will work for the repeal of Obamacare. We call upon Americans of like mind who love liberty and want the Constitution restored to join us in this effort. Candidates for national office should be conducting webinars, town hall meetings, etc. to rally the people to our cause and to answer their questions. A question that deserves an answer is ?If you oppose Obamacare, what kind of healthcare would you propose for America??.  Describe your health plan and tell the currently insured where it would leave them and where it would leave the poor and uninsured. Candidates must be able and willing to answer those questions if they are to be taken seriously as candidates. Mr. Romney, the Republican candidate, now says that he would see Obamacare repealed, but since he invented it while Governor of Massachusetts I am skeptical of whether or not we would ever see repeal under a Romney presidency. There are however, other choices besides Romney and Obama. The Constitution Party?s candidates, Virgil Goode and Jim Clymer are clearly the best candidates. Virgil Goode is the one candidate who would, without a doubt, see to the repeal of Obamacare. Like the men in Washington?s ragtag army we fight on suffering defeat after defeat but confident that by God?s grace we will ultimately achieve victory and restore the rule of law as expressed in the Constitution. To learn how you can help the Constitution Party and its candidates visit http://www.constitutionparty.com/ and www.goodeforpresident.com.

The following Examiner.com article byMark Wachtler includes reactions to the SCOTUS health care reform law by (listed here alphabetically):

Constitution Party?s Virgil Goode

Green Party?s Jill Stein

Libertarian Party?s Gary Johnson

Peace & Freedom Party

Socialist Party?s Stewart Alexander

Socialist Equality Party?s Jerry White

The complete article is available online at:

http://www.examiner.com/article/opposition-presidential-candidates-comment-on-obamacare-ruling

IPR readers aware of other Third Party candidate statements on this issue are welcome to post those (ideally with links) in the comments section below.

Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) has been dismissive of the Supreme Court and its opinion upholding the health law.

Taking a Stand for Freedom

Atlanta, GA – June 28th, 2012- “Not if we have anything to say about it!” said Ricardo Davis, Chairman of the Constitution Party of Georgia. That’s Davis’ reaction to the Supreme Court ruling that has stunned and angered many Americans – that the widely unpopular legislation known as Obamacare is constitutional. “Our nation has taken another step downward in our devolution toward socialism,” Davis said, adding that he is “saddened” by the ruling.

Even more stunning perhaps is that the majority opinion of the 5-4 ruling was written by a member of the court who had been expected to vote against President Obama’s signature health care bill: Chief Justice John Roberts. In it, the court upheld Obamacare’s most controversial provision, the so-called individual mandate, which forces most taxpayers to buy health insurance or pay a fine. The court ruled the mandate is a tax, falls within the powers of Congress and therefore is constitutional. By ruling the mandate is a tax the court sidestepped the controversial issue of whether Congress could impose it under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

But Davis praised the four dissenters on the high court, including Justice Anthony Kennedy, who unexpectedly voted with conservatives Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Their opinion, Davis said, “really brought the salient constitutional issues squarely into view.”

Socialists Rejoice While Patriots Mourn

The dissenting opinion called the individual mandate unconstitutional and said the entire law should have been struck down. It was also bluntly critical of the majority, pointing out that Congress never intended the individual mandate to be a tax. In a statement from the bench, Kennedy said the majority ruling “saves a statute Congress did not write. The court,” he said, “regards its strained statutory interpretation as judicial modesty. It is not. It amounts instead to a vast judicial overreaching.”

The supreme irony of the ruling is that it makes the five Justices of the majority the first in the country to agree with the administration’s argument that it has such a power to tax. Every lower court to consider the issue had rejected that, including those which ultimately upheld the law itself.

The court also took issue with Obamacare’s expansion of Medicaid without striking it down entirely. It ruled the federal government cannot withhold all Medicaid funding from states that choose not to take part in the expansion. Rather, it must give states a choice between taking part in the expanded program or leaving it as is.

In his opinion, Roberts admitted there is widespread public opposition to the controversial health care law, but said policy decisions can be made only by the legislative and executive branches, not the courts. And he added, “It is not our job to save the people from the consequences of their political decisions.”

House Republicans have already scheduled a vote to repeal Obamacare for the week of July 9th. But Davis noted that a number of GOP lawmakers have played both sides of the Obamacare issue. “Which Republicans initially voted for Obamacare?” he asked, “and what have they done since its passage to try to knock it down? Even those who voted against the bill – what have they done since then? How many appropriations bills have they voted for that funded various parts of this bill?”

“If Republicans were serious,” Davis added, “they would have done something a long time ago. Our president’s policies in general and Obamacare in particular represent a great overreach and should have been resisted in like manner by any lawful means at Congress’ disposal.”

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney also weighed in on the Obamacare ruling, promising that “What the Court did not do on its last day in session, I will do on my first day if elected president of the United States and that is I will act to repeal Obamacare.”

But there is a saying that “If there’s a difference between what you say and what you do, what you do is the truth.” And despite what he said, what Mitt Romney did as Governor of Massachusetts was to sign into law what became known as “Romneycare.” That, according to MIT economist Jonathan Gruber – one of the architects of Obamacare – was the very foundation of the federal legislation.

Interviewed on MSNBC’s The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, Gruber said this about Romneycare and Obamacare: “The truth is that the Affordable Care Act is essentially based on what we accomplished in Massachusetts. It’s the same basic structure applied nationally. John McDonough (the executive director of Health Care For All, a Massachusetts consumer health advocacy organization and) one of the other advisers who worked in both Massachusetts and advised the White House, said it’s the Massachusetts bill with three more zeros. That’s basically a good description of what the federal bill did.”

This issue, Davis said, is now in the hands of the American people “who wish to honor the legacy our Founders gave us of liberty under law.” He called it “a challenge that will set the stage for the next ten years of political activity and impact all three branches of the federal government.”

Davis also called on state governments to interpose Obamacare. “The 10th Amendment,” he said, “is one means by which the American people, though their elected representatives, can interpose to protect our Constitutional liberties.” But even at the state level, he said, there may be a lack of political backbone. “If your governor and state legislature respond by saying the law’s been upheld and we must comply, you should seriously consider finding a replacement for any elected official who will not act to protect you and your community from this attack on your constitutional liberty.”

And Davis suggested the days of political compromise, of ‘reaching across the aisle,’ are over. “It is past time for getting along. It is past time for saying ‘Oh well, we lost, so let’s go with the flow.’ If our elected officials are serious about standing up against Obamacare then they will not be afraid of doing what is necessary to contend for our liberties.”

But those who are politically active, Davis cautioned, whether they are trying to influence members of Congress or state or local officials must also learn to “follow the money.” The federal government, he said, often uses what are cynically referred to as “favorable appropriations” – essentially bribes – to assure that not only members of Congress but governors and state and local lawmakers are pliable and will comply with its mandates.

Constitution Party Presidential Candidate Virgil Goode has also called for the repeal of Obamacare. But Goode, a former Virginia Congressman, goes further, promising when he is elected to push for tort reform as well. “A big factor in medical costs,” he says, “is the high cost of malpractice insurance for our physicians and other health care providers.” Goode says tort reform should put limits on “attorney fees and the amount of damages recoverable for non-economic losses.”

The Constitution Party of Georgia Position on Obamacare

Simply put, Obamacare is an assult against our God-given inalienable rights. We oppose the individual health care mandate and we aim to have this law overturned after the fall elections. The Constitution Party’s official position on healthcare can be found here.

Our Fight Against Tyranny Has Just Begun!

It’s not too late to right the injustice. In the upcoming months, the Constitution Party will use all necessare legal means to protect our freedoms and push for a complete repeal of Obamacare.. Wask that you join us in this fight. Our inalienable rights as citizens of the United States are under direct attack. Please us today and stop the advance of Federal socialism!

To Become a Constitutional Activist

Please visit our website at: gaconstitutionparty.org,

email us: at:secretary@gaconstitutionparty.org

or phone us: 404-671-8502