To appease those they view as rigid, conservative Catholics, the administration’s talking points are that they’ll “work it out” with them, give them a year to “adapt” their consciences to engaging in behavior that is against their values, and, perhaps, the favorite means of the White House to ensure a minimum of voter loss: hand out a waiver.

But, exactly what should be “worked out?” “Adapt” to what? A “waiver” from what? All of this talk of flexibility is helping the White House to muddy up the real issue.

The spin by the White House, in the midst of this constitutional crisis, is simply a variant on its age- old theme that healthcare is an unalienable right that the government must give to people. Remember that, in liberalism, unalienable rights come from the government, not from the Creator. With the contraception, etc. mandate, the administration just tweaked the message a bit- made it a bit “pinker,” dare we say: that all women deserve access to free contraception- including Catholic women. How could we leave Catholic women out? After all, that would be discriminatory, right? Wrong.

Women do not deserve access to free contraception, sterilization, or abortion-inducing drugs. The word deserve is the linchpin to the common liberal ploy of guilt induction that can only be assuaged, according to liberals, by government intervention. To deserve something is to be entitled to it. Enter the government.

Women- Catholic or not- do not deserve contraception. They choose it. They choose it because they choose to have sexual intercourse. If they choose to have sexual intercourse and do not wish to become pregnant, they take a risk. If they do not wish to take that risk, they could choose not to have sex. If they choose to have sex anyway, then they should pay for contraceptives if they wish to minimize their chances of becoming pregnant. It’s really not so hard.

If women had health savings accounts, which would allow them to purchase health-related needs out of pocket, they could use those accounts to buy contraceptives. They would be free to make their own choices. If they have ObamaCare, they have no choice because the government tells them- and everyone else- how their healthcare dollars will be spent. With ObamaCare, women- and everyone else- pay for those contraceptives, even if they are middle-aged and no longer need them.

To manipulate women- and everyone else- into feeling good about the fact that, with ObamaCare, there is no personal choice in spending healthcare dollars, the Obama administration is telling everyone that women deserve, that they are entitled to, free contraceptives. But, they are lying, because, in the end, women who would choose to purchase contraceptives would spend significantly less if they bought them with their own healthcare dollars from their own health savings account than through the high cost of health insurance and taxes associated with ObamaCare. If we own our health insurance plans, we make the decisions about how the dollars are spent, we look for the best buys for our money, or maybe we choose not to buy at all. When we all become consumers, costs come down, and we are in charge of our bodies.

If those who are outraged by this mandate cave to any attempt by the Obama administration to assuage their ire, they will be committing the same mistake they made in the first place: supporting government intervention in healthcare. Indeed, some in the Church have screwed up big time in its support of government intervention, under the guise of social justice. It is unfortunate that these individuals have contributed to this issue becoming the constitutional crisis it is, simply because they bought into the idea that government should provide the same healthcare for everyone. It is unfortunate that they bought into the idea that government should have the job of redistributing wealth rather than the people themselves who, history has shown, actually do a pretty good job of it on their own, through their own personal charitable donations.

Because some in the Church welcomed government intervention in healthcare, they may be willing to accept a “waiver” of sorts, from the contraception, etc. mandate, from the Obama administration, if one is offered. In that case, however, they will have skirted around the real issue. The big elephant in the room of why anyone at all, private insurers included, Catholic or not, should be forced, by the government, to provide free contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs will be overlooked and obfuscated by the allaying of a perceived constitutional crisis concerning freedom of religion.

Liberal women who say they deserve free contraception from the government, are, quite frankly, selling their bodies to the government. They are the least liberated women of all. If the government gives you something because it says you deserve it, it then has a stake in you, and it owns you. Women who make their own choices and use their own dollars to purchase products based on those choices, are, indeed, liberated.

If all Americans used their own healthcare dollars to make their own purchases for their healthcare needs, they would be much freer and likely have more of their own money to boot.

He’s held big gigs at BMW and Ford.  He also worked way up the food chain at (now $85 billion bailed-out) Chrysler and General Motors (GM) – retiring as GM’s Vice Chairman in 2010.

And he has recently written a piece:

Chevy Volt And The Wrong-Headed Right

…in vociferous defense of the Chevy Volt.

You know, the more-than-$200,000 in government-subsidies-per-unit-sold Volt.

The overproduced, unprofitable, unpopular, combustible Volt.  (And January 2011’s sales were no less disappointing.)

That Chevy Volt.

Are we on the Right wrong-headed?  Let’s take Mr. Lutz’s piece piecemeal and see.

The recent media coverage of so-called “Chevrolet Volt fires,” especially by the conservative talk shows and Fox News, has attracted my attention and ire.

Let’s set out the facts (and feel free to check them yourself):

Don’t mind if we do.

1) Not one Chevrolet Volt has ever caught fire in normal use or in accidents. Not a single one.

Fundamentally untrue, as we laid out in great detail after last week’s House Oversight Volt hearing.

From our piece:

There were in fact three other, private-owner Volt fires.  None of which involved Volts that were in crashes.

These three fires involved Volts that were simply garaged or recharging – i.e. “in normal use.”

More from Mr. Lutz:

2) The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), even after the highly artificial crash test (placing the car on its back, even though it did not roll over in the test) nevertheless awarded the Volt NHTSA’s highest crash-safety rating: 5 stars. Volt is supremely safe.

But there wasn’t just one NHTSA fire – there were three.

More from us:

The one NHTSA Volt fire discussed at the hearing was not the only NHTSA Volt fire that occurred.  In November, there were two others.

After conducting three different tests two weeks ago, the NHTSA found that the Volt’s battery either caught fire or began to smoke in two out of the three.

So that’s three Volt fires – all in the hands of the Obama Administration, all after crashes.

For a grand total of six Volt fires (about which we know).

And excuse us for being slightly suspect of the Government’s Five Star rating of Government Motors.

Especially when NHTSA, the Barack Obama White House and GM all covered-up the Volt fire(s) for nearly six months.

Especially when President Barack Obama is campaigning for reelection on the $85 billion auto industry bailout “success,” and showing up at car shows to do it.  So bad news for the Volt and Government Motors is bad news for him and his reelect.

So, again, excuse our suspicion.

More from Mr. Lutz:

3) The crashed Volt, its battery shorted by coolant from the period unjustifiably spent “feet up,” caught fire three weeks after said test. (I submit that this would provide adequate time for surviving passengers to exit the vehicle.)

Again, what about the other five fires?  Three of which were just plugged in or garaged – “in normal use?”

Mr. Lutz:

4) On average, 278,000 cars with gasoline engines caught fire in the U.S. each year between 2003 and 2007, according to the National Fire Protection Association.

True – but gasoline engines are a long-known commodity.  Lithium-ion battery cars are not.

And when the Obama Administration and GM have spent half the Volt’s shelf life covering up Volt flameouts, it certainly warrants additional attention.

Mr. Lutz:

5) No factory-produced electric vehicle has ever caught fire, to the best of my knowledge.

As we’ve just demonstrated, Mr. Lutz needs to better his knowledge.

And Mr. Lutz is making a blanket assertion – applicable beyond just the Volt to all electric cars.  Is he really comfortable going that far?

Mr. Lutz:

6) The Volt, the most technologically advanced car on the planet, was conceived by me and my team well before any federal bailout of GM.

Is the pride of creative authorship clouding Mr. Lutz’s judgement?

I’m not sure the Volt is the “most technologically advanced car on the planet” – given that the 1891 electric Morrison had a better battery range than the Volt.

The Volt was in fact conceived by Mr. Lutz and his team, in 2007.  But I notice, Mr. Lutz, that you didn’t rush to mass-produce it, did you?  It existed only as a visual aide for auto shows – not for actual for-sale production.

Only with the arrival of President Obama – and We the People’s $50 billion – did Volts find their way to the mass-assembly line.

Mr. Lutz:

These are the bedrock facts.

Yours aren’t.  Ours are.

Mr. Lutz:

Now, how did the U.S. right-wing media choose to report this admittedly headline-tempting news?

A nationally syndicated editorial three-panel cartoon stated (I believe I remember the sequence): “Thomas Edison discovered electricity;” then, “Alexander Graham Bell discovered the telephone;” and, in the third panel, “But it took the US Government to discover fire!” (accompanied by a drawing of a burning Chevy Volt).

Come on, that cartoon is just FUNNY.

Mr. Lutz then goes into some detail about Rush Limbaugh and Lou Dobbs (appearing on Bill O’Reilly’s Fox News Channel show) publicly decrying the Volt.

Then Mr. Lutz writes:

Much air time was spent on the $50 billion-plus (GM) bailout, which, the audience was left to assume, “funded” the Volt, doubtlessly at the whim of Obama’s known army of evil enviro-Nazis, intent on forcing vehicle electrification on a good-ole’-boy, V8-lovin’ populace.

Again, the Lutz-era GM created the Volt – but never mass-produced it.  Obama and the bailout arrived – and suddenly Government Motors is (sort-of) selling Volts.

Clearly there is some electric vehicle forcing going on.  GM in 2011 produced about 10,000 Volts – and sold only 7,671.  And until very recently – when finally hounded into  submission-to-sales-reality – Akerson and GM were planning on upping 2012 Volt production to 60,000.

Sounds forced to me.

Mr. Lutz:

To top it off, these two media pros lamented the fact that the same government that had forced GM to produce the Volt was now extending $7,500 tax credits towards its purchase, thus squandering even more of “our taxpayer” dollars on this failed Socialist-collectivist flop. Truth? The $7,500 tax credit was enacted under the Bush administration!

True.  But again, you, Mr. Lutz, never produced the Volt for sale under the Bush Administration.  Only after you left, under Obama – when General Motors became with our coin Government Motors – did the foolish tax credit apply to the foolish Volt.

And we Right-wingers have long acknowledged – and publicly decried and lamented – many terrible Bush Administration policies.  The $7,500-per-foolish-car is but another.

Mr. Lutz:

But who the hell cares about facts when you’re in O’Reilly’s self-described “No Spin Zone?” (The fine print might as well read, “We said ‘no spin,’ not ‘no deliberate misstatement of facts.’ ”)

Again, as we have thoroughly demonstrated, it is the esteemed Mr. Lutz that is misstating and omitting facts.

Mr. Lutz:

What on Earth is wrong with the conservative media movement that it feels it’s OK to spread false information, OK to damage the reputation of perhaps the finest piece of mechanical technology our country has produced since the space shuttle, OK to hurt an iconic American company that is roaring back to global pre-eminence, OK to hurt American employment in Hamtramck, Mich., as long as it damages the Obama administration’s reputation?

It is Obama that is staking his reputation – and his reelection effort – on the $50 billion GM bailout and the Volt.

If our pointing out egregious, inconvenient facts is harmful thereto, it is simply happy collateral damage.

Mr. Lutz concludes:

While as a conservative Republican I may well share the goal, I deplore the means employed to attain it. The conservative cause damages itself, destroys its credibility through the expedient spreading of untruths. The public will figure it out.

The right-wing “talking heads”, O’Reilly and Limbaugh at the forefront, have managed to make me embarrassed to describe myself as a conservative.

Come on, you guys. Shape up! There’s plenty of legitimate fodder out there. Let’s leave the “invention of facts” to the left-wing climate-change alarmists.

Unfortunately for Mr. Lutz – and the Obama Administration – there are plenty of inconvenient truths about Government Motors, the Obama Administration bailout and the absurd Chevy Volt.

And we “wrong-headed” Right-wingers are the only ones delivering them.

Mr. Lutz is in need of but a minor recalibration.  The Chevy Volt he’s defending may be unrecoverable.

Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pennsylvania), who serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and chairs its Subcommittee on Health, said that Republicans will be ready for the open window provided by a Supreme Court ruling regardless of the nature of that decision.

Congressman Pitts said he expects the High Court to strike down the individual mandate, but not the entire law. He added that it is also possible the Court could say that federal tax law precludes its decision on the mandate’s constitutionality until after 2015. “We’ll have a window of opportunity with everyone looking to explain that the Affordable Care Act is not fully implemented yet…We’ll use that opportunity and that window to discuss the full ramifications of the Affordable Care Act,” Rep. Pitts said.

Rep. Pitts, who has a Heritage Action for America score of 79%, indicated that the Republican plan will include long-standing GOP priorities, such as limits on medical malpractice suits, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and expansion of the use of health savings accounts. In addition, his committee plans the following:

• A bill to be sent to the House floor this spring which will repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), the “expert” panel charged with cutting Medicare payments to health providers.

• Continue to urge a roll-back of the section of ObamaCare that prohibits states from cutting their Medicaid eligibility until 2014.

• Oversight hearings on the Obama administration’s approach to the definition of “essential” health benefits.

• A major Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reauthorization by June 30, ahead of the September deadline when the current reauthorization expires.

Congressman Pitts indicated that Republicans do not plan to preserve the requirement that insurers cover people who have pre-existing conditions. Instead, the GOP will propose state-based pools in which the government would pay costs for the very ill who require the most care, rather than requirements for coverage by private insurers, a situation that leads to higher insurance costs for everyone.

Though Republicans should be praised for coming up with a plan to reform healthcare in anticipation of the SCOTUS’ decision, we can hardly expect that any “replacement” of ObamaCare will go smoothly if the Court declares that either the mandate or the entire law is unconstitutional. Sadly for the nation, we have an administration that has demonstrated it cares little for the rule of law or the Constitution. Should there be a decision that the law is unconstitutional in its entirety or in part, we cannot expect that the current administration will comply with the decision. As we have seen on many occasions already, this president is likely to thumb his nose at a ruling that is unfavorable to him, using his czars and executive orders to “get around” the ruling in some way in order to continue implementation of his signature legislation.

In addition, as we have also seen, a Republican healthcare reform bill will not likely be entertained by a Democratic-led Senate which could be more concerned about injury to its ego, following a perceived “defeat” by the Supreme Court, rather than responsibility to the citizens of the nation. If a GOP-proposed healthcare reform bill is considered, there will likely be demands, by liberal members of Congress, for government-funded abortion and other “pet” issues in exchange for passage. It is unlikely the president would sign a bill that did not contain some “gifts” to his liberal base.

It is good for Republicans to begin the discussion of free market healthcare reform. But, reliance upon the decision of the High Court to rid the nation of this overreaching law will likely lead to disappointment. All the more reason to elect more conservative members of Congress and a conservative President with vision who will fully repeal this onerous legislation and lead us into a new era of liberty.

I attended Wednesday’s 8:00am (8am?!?) House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing entitled:

Volt Vehicle Fire: What Did NHTSA Know And When Did They Know It?

The witnesses were killer:

National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), Barack Obama-appointee Administrator David Strickland.

And General Motors (GM), Barack Obama-appointee CEO Dan Akerson.

The scope of the hearing was a bit too narrow – leaving out some fairly important attending facts.  Like, say, the (at least) five other Chevy Volt fires that have occurred besides the one being discussed.

This hearing was all about a single June Volt blaze.  The battery burst into flames about three weeks after a test crash at and by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA).

A fire about which Obama’s NHTSA did tell the Obama White House.

But a fire about which neither Obama’s NHTSA, the Obama Administration nor Obama’s GM told the American people for nearly six months – and then did so only when forced by a looming Bloomberg news story.

But:

The White House had no role in the decision to delay disclosure of a fire that broke out in a crash-tested Chevrolet Volt, the Obama administration told Congress on Friday.

Of COURSE not.

But:

Joan Claybrook, a former administrator at NHTSA believes part of the reason for the delay was the “fragility of Volt sales.” Yet she also believes that “NHTSA could have put out a consumer alert, not to tell them [customers] for six months makes no sense to me.”

Obama is running for reelection in great part on the non-success “success” of the $85 billion auto industry bailout.

On which he once promised we’d make money.  Then had to begrudgingly up the (admitted to) loss from $14.3 billion to $23.6 billion.

And We the Taxpayers still own 500 million shares of GM stock – which is tanking.  So that loss number still has growth prospects.

That auto industry bailout “success.”

Obama mentioned GM prominently in Tuesday night’s campaign – I mean State of the Union – speech:

America: Built to (Be) Last

And had as one of his bio-props – I mean guests – a GM plant manager.

The takeaway from all of this?

For Obama, notifying Americans of their potential immolation-by-Volt is of less import than his keeping his gig past November.

—–

And there’s tremendous immolation potential.

The one NHTSA Volt fire discussed at the hearing was not the only NHTSA Volt fire that occurred.  In November, there were two others.

After conducting three different tests two weeks ago, the NHTSA found that the Volt’s battery either caught fire or began to smoke in two out of the three.

So that’s three Volt fires – all in the hands of the Obama Administration, all after crashes.

But Obama’s GM now says they’ve fixed the problem – and the Obama Administration has (shocker) given GM the good-to-go.

So all is well, right?

Ummm, no.  There were in fact three other, private-owner Volt fires.  None of which involved Volts that were in crashes.

—–

There was the Volt that in April burst into flames – twice.  These were the fires that led to Obama’s NHTSA beginning its investigation.

And then in November another Volt leapt into flames.  While Obama’s NHTSA was still investigating – but after the NHTSA-Obama Administration-GM cover-up had come to light (get it?).

The home that garaged this particular immolated Volt gets its power from Duke Energy – which after the fire felt compelled to issue a warning:

Duke Energy officials want anyone who has a (Volt) charging station to stop using it until they know the devices are safe.

So the charging station is at least suspect.  (So too the charging station cable?)

We still have no idea what caused these fires.  The only thing we do know is that they were not caused by crashes – because these cars were never in crashes.

So why did Obama’s NHTSA, the Obama Administration and Obama’s GM singularly focus on (but one of three) post-crash Volt fires?

When none of these three privately-owned combustible Volts had been in accidents?

We – still – don’t know.  Anything.

But don’t worry: The Obama Administration has declared that the Obama-owned GM Chevy Volt is perfectly safe – just in time for Obama’s reelection campaign.

And GM’s new Volt ad campaign, which is pretty much entitled:

If You Don’t Like the Volt, You Don’t Like America

Don’t you feel safer?

Romney fits right into the Left’s absurd anti-capitalism, “robber baron,” Occupy Wall Street anti-1%-er, scorched earth storyline.

Romney is very wealthy, which for Obama and his Democrats is the height of eee-vill (except – these Donkeys are mostly rich…).  Never mind that Romney’s wealth is right in line with many past Presidents and candidates – including 2004 Democrat nominee John Kerry.  (The difference?  Romney earned it, Kerry married it.)

And as Romney recently told us, he these days pays the 15% capital gains tax rate – rather than the (absurdly) higher income tax rates those of us receiving salaries do.  Never mind that this is perfectly legal (and good fiscal policy, and “fair”) – it is culled right from the Leftist, Warren Buffett “I pay less in taxes than my secretary” fraudulent script.

—–

How did Romney make his coin?  Via the epitome of eeeee-villll free market entities – the venture capital firm.  His was, of course, Bain Capital.

Yes, Bain sometimes invests in failing companies.  Some of which they determine to be not worth saving, so down they go.  Welcome to Reality, Boys and Girls.

See, President Obama – it’s kind of like your “investing” in Solyndra, and Fisker, and Beacon Power, and….  Only President Obama – yours never work out.  And Bain would never dump money into such absurd companies or concepts.  And Bain uses their own coin, not ours.

Bain has created far more jobs than they’ve closed down – which again makes them the polar opposite of Obama, Inc.  There is no Staples, Sports Authority or myriad other Bain-like successes to which Obama can point and say “See, my government ‘investment’ did that.”

“‘Shovel-ready’ wasn’t as shovel-ready as we expected.”  And “created or saved” doesn’t cut it – and fooled only the foolish.

—–

And, of course, the Obama Administration is chock full of Wall Street 1%-ers.  Whom they vilify and legislatively assault by day – and shake down for campaign cash by night.  Heck, Democrats receive more contributions from Bain Capital than do Republicans.  Obama has his own self received $80,000 from Romney’s old digs.

And the new Obama Administration acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Jeffrey Zients, worked for Bain Capital.

And behold Obama, Inc. campaign adviser Stephanie Cutter.  Who just wrote a scathing memo about Romney’s Bain days – subtitled “Profit at Any Cost.”

Cutter sounded like a sworn enemy of private equity.  Except a few years ago, she was a spokeswoman for J.C. Flowers, a private-equity firm….

Presumably Cutter wanted to be as well compensated as possible, by J.C. Flowers and the “several Fortune 500 companies” her communications firm served, according to her bio.

Just another poster-child for Obama, Inc.’s “Poverty for Thee – Not for Me,” DC-Wall Street Nexis.

For Obama, Inc., Bain’s good for campaign fodder – and campaign cash.  And, as it turns out, even more than that.

—–

We’ve just discussed Bain Capital investing – vis a vis Obama, Inc. “investing.”

One of the biggest Taxpayer Money “investments” is the $50+ billion in General Motors (GM).  Which has been an unmitigated disaster.

President Obama once promised us we’d make money on the auto bailout – then had to begrudgingly up the (admitted to) loss from $14.3 billion to $23.6 billion.  And We the Taxpayers still own 500 million shares of GM stock – which is tanking.  So that loss number still has growth potential.

GM is foundering because they insist on doing fabulous things like overproduce the unprofitable, unpopular, combustible Chevy Volt.  And in 2010 file for more green non-energy “energy patents – a la Solyndra, Fisker, etc. – than any other company in America.

As GM continued to sink like a stone, guess who Obama’s Auto Task Force asked for assistance in trying to turn around their colossal automotive failure?

Why, Romney’s ex- Bain Capital – and their fellow Wall Streeters.

Oops.

Obama Administration officials working on a turnaround of General Motors and Chrysler asked for advice from the consulting firm Bain & Company, among other consulting firms, speaking to partners there at least twice, according to multiple sources familiar with the conversations.

In addition, a partner at Bain & Company later detailed his advice on the auto companies when he was contacted for a follow-up review by the office of the inspector general for TARP, according to that office.

—–

Obama will this year be trying to convince We the People to give him four more years in the White House.

Not because of anything he’s done – because what he’s done has been atrocious – but to prevent an evil 1%-er from succeeding him.

And if that proposed successor is Romney, Obama, Inc. has the anti-Bain Capital dossier already prepared and at the ready.

But when it came down to it, Obama, Inc. had to admit that they had with GM (and just about everything else) absolutely no idea what they were doing.

And they had to go to…Bain Capital, and their fellow eeee-villl Wall Streeters, to ask for help in trying to salvage their incredible failure.

Whose expert advice he desperately sought as he amateurishly blew up General Motors – and our $50+ billion.

The attempted spoonful-of-sugar to help force down the bad Progressive medicine they are pushing.

Which brings us to General Motors (GM) and one of the Leftist ideological windmills at which they tilt – the Chevy Volt.

We the Taxpayers have spent billions subsidizing the Volt.  And continue subsidizing it still.

We bailed out GM ($50 billion) and Chrysler to the tune of $83 billion.  On which the Obama Administration now admits we’ll lose (at least) $23.6 billion.  (President Obama once upon a time promised us we’d actually make money on the deal.)

We the Taxpayers are still stuck holding 500 million shares of GM stock – on which we are poised to lose tens of billions of dollars more.

But you know what makes all of this terrible-ness so much less worse?  GM spent some of our money on – the Chevy Volt official song and music video:

Don’t you feel better?

The GM-official “GMVolt” YouTube video page description of which reads as follows:

Chevrolet’s official Chevy Volt fun and educational song set to a historical collage of developments and progress as captured on the website GM-Volt.com.

“Educational” – like the aforementioned government elementary school songs are “educational.”

Now, a defense could be proffered that companies write songs and cut videos for advertising purposes all the time.  Fine and true.  That being said, this Volt song was (as far as I can find) never made into an actual ad.

GM’s official YouTube posting of it has only (as of this writing) 30,048 views.  And it does not appear on the aforementioned GM-Volt.com’s video page.

The song is a total (if unintentional for GM) joke – and we get that it is.  This is not the end of the world.  It is just another ridiculous aspect of the ridiculous from-the-start Chevy Volt – and auto bailout.

And the joke gets worse.

At the 2009 Los Angeles Auto Show, GM also gave us – the Chevy Volt Dancers:

A troupe with a routine devised to accompany the Chevy Volt tune.

Just what every car company needs – a band with a floor show.

Do not attempt to operate heavy machinery for up to 24 hours after viewing either of these videos.  If you’ve watched both, you may want to contact your physician.

—–

All of this is yet another reason to be thankful that We the People have spent nearly $60 billion propping up General Motors and subsidizing the Chevy Volt.

Don’t you feel thankful?

That’s where the Replace part comes in. Now, I won’t whine and complain about how things seem to take a long time to get done in Washington, but the replacement for ObamaCare should be on the assembly line, waiting to be packaged and sent to stores near all of us. We know the talking points that make good common sense: purchase health insurance across state lines, own our health insurance policies so they are portable, tort reform, free-market principles, etc. Of course, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin), the reliable person that he is, has thought through a great deal of this, and has based his conservative answer to health care reform on his Medicare reform proposal.

But, where are the details and how do we plug ObamaCare’s replacement into our lives if the law is declared unconstitutional?

Health care legislation is not like other aspects of our lives. If the Supreme Court nixes ObamaCare, all those 26 year-olds who are currently on their parents’ plans could suddenly be without health insurance. What about pre-existing conditions? How exactly will this feature, that most people find favorable, be translated into a conservative health care reform plan? How will free-market principles become part of health care reform? And what’s the timeline?

Republicans need a single, detailed plan that all Americans can understand easily. That means Republicans will need to work together, using Congressman Ryan’s plan as a foundation. Delay, or failure to comprehend that Americans- both individuals and businesses- are anxious about health insurance and health care costs, as they have been since ObamaCare was passed, will only create more of an image of incompetence and invite further ridicule from liberal Democrats and their cronies, the formerly mainstream media.

Currently, Republicans have the American people on their side. Most Americans continue to want ObamaCare repealed. However, if a Supreme Court decision comes before full congressional repeal, Republicans would be wise to have a reform plan ready with an easy-to-read instruction manual. True, Senate Democrats may not give it the time of day, but let Americans see, once again, the Senate Democrats as the true obstructionists they are, just prior to the election.