"If Obamacare is tossed aside in whole or in part by the Supreme Court tomorrow, history will view the bill as one of the most remarkable blunders made by any president  -- both in terms of policy and politics. Even if it is upheld, Obama will have to carry it as an albatross into the fall campaign knowing that the majority of likely voters want it repealed, and they can accomplish that goal in only one way: removing him from office."

"Arizona bears the brunt of the country’s illegal immigration problem. Its citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants who invade their property, strain their social services, and even place their lives in jeopardy. Federal officials have been unable to remedy the problem, and indeed have recently shown that they are simply unwilling to do so. 

"Arizona has moved to protect its sovereignty -- not in contradiction of federal law, but in complete compliance with it. The laws under challenge here do not extend or revise federal immigration restrictions, but merely enforce those restrictions more effectively. If securing its territory in this fashion is not within the power of Arizona, we should cease referring to it as a sovereign State. For these reasons, I dissent."

"As Barack Obama’s lead over Mitt Romney in the polls narrows, and his presumed fundraising advantage seems about to become a disadvantage, it’s alibi time for some of his backers.  

"His problem, they say, is that some voters don’t like him because he’s black. Or they don’t like his policies because they don’t like having a black president. 

"So, you see, if you don’t like Obamacare, it’s not because it threatens to take away your health insurance, or to deny coverage for some treatments. It’s because you don’t like black people. ... 

"There’s an obvious problem with the racism alibi: Barack Obama has run for president before, and he won. Voters in 2008 knew he was black. Most of them voted for him. He carried 28 states and won 365 electoral votes."

"Actually, it's amazing that during an existential crisis -- a crisis that is economic, cultural and political, and that bears on our role and purpose in the world -- both candidates for our highest office have felt free to be so . . . well, insubstantial. Neither Mr. Romney nor Mr. Obama has caught hold of the overall meaning of his candidacy, Mr. Romney because so far he's chosen not to, and Mr. Obama because he's tried and failed. 

"With just more than 130 days to go, Mr. Romney has to start pulling from his brain and soul a coherent and graspable sense of the meaning of his run. 'I will be president for this reason and this. I will move for this and this. The philosophy that impels me consists of these things.' Only when he does this will he show that he actually does have a larger purpose, and only then will people really turn toward him. He has to tell Americans why they can believe him, why a nation saturated with politics, chronically disappointed by its leaders, and tired of promises can, actually, put some faith in him. 

"They want to know how America can come back. Because they're pretty sure, down deep, that America has another comeback in her."

"Attorney General Eric Holder's refusal to fully disclose the documents associated with Operation Fast and Furious and President Obama's assertion of executive privilege serves to compound this tragedy. It denies the Terry family and the American people the truth. Our son, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, was killed by memebers of a Mexican drug cartel armed with weapons from this failed Justice Department guntrafficking investigation. For more than 18 months, we have been asking our federal government for justice and accountability. The documents sought by the House Oversight Committee and associated with Operation Fast and Furious should be produced and turned over to the Committee. Our son lost his life protecting this nation, and it is very disappointing that we are now faced with an administration that seems more concerned with protecting themselves rather than revealing the truth behind Operation Fast and Furious."

"It's presidential season, so again pundits are indignant that money is spent on politics. Spent by corporations! And rich people! Because the Supreme Court allowed that, '2012 will be a miserable year,' says The Washington Post's E.J. Dionne. 

"2012 may be miserable -- but if it is, it won't be because corporations spend on politics. And anyway, they have a right to spend.  

"In politics, money is speech. ... 

"It is shameful that leftists let their hatred of corporations lead them to throw free speech under the bus. There is a smarter way to get corporate money out of politics: Shrink the state. If government has fewer favors to sell, citizens will spend less money trying to win them."

"Next time, Congress shouldn’t bother. In another chapter in a long-running battle, it voted in December 2010 on the DREAM Act granting amnesty to illegal immigrants brought here as children. The lawmakers appeared to believe that they were entrusted with determining whether or not the legislation became law. 

"How quaint. Passage of the DREAM Act wasn’t necessary, and its defeat -- by a filibuster in the Senate -- was an irrelevance. ... 

"Last week the Obama administration activated the central provisions of the DREAM Act by wielding the most awesome power in Washington -- President Barack Obama’s say-so. He must imagine himself as fit for the company of the great lawgivers Hammurabi and Moses on the frieze over the Supreme Court. In one memorandum signed by his Homeland Security secretary, he claimed powers that literally once belonged to kings."

"WASHINGTON -- We pay our presidents for judgment, and President Obama committed a colossal error of judgment in making health-care 'reform' a centerpiece of his first term. Ahead of the Supreme Court's decision on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) -- and regardless of how the court decides -- it's clear that Obama overreached. His attempt to achieve universal health insurance coverage is a massive feat of social engineering that, by its sweeping nature, weakens the economic recovery and antagonizes millions of Americans. ... 

"To all the ACA's substantive defects is now added a looming political and constitutional firestorm. Whether the Supreme Court upholds the whole law, strikes it all down or discards only parts, anger and outrage will ensue. The court may be accused of usurping legislative powers or of cowering before White House intimidation. The ACA has become an instrument of the political polarization that the president regularly deplores. 

"When historians examine Obama's first term, the irony will be plain. A president bent on burnishing his legacy acted in ways that did the opposite. It's a case of bad judgment."

"At a speech in Baltimore, President Obama laughingly dismissed the notion that he is responsible for our nation's current spending orgy. Seriously. ...

"A fascinating question is whether Obama actually believes this fantasy or he and his disciples are laughing at us, as well. ...

"Obama has not cut trillions in spending. At most, he has been forced to agree to reductions in the level of spending increases. But even here, he has gone back on his word and broken his agreements. He offers us nothing but more spending proposals -- claiming it's the only way to stimulate the economy and pretending we are too stupid to realize we've already been there and done that.

"Obama's claim that he is not a big spender is preposterous, but if he insists on insulting the intelligence of the American people in sticking to his story, that's fine with me because it will make our task of defeating him in November that much easier."

"The authors of our Constitution may have envisioned a federal government of limited powers that would leave education, police and fire protection to local governments, but since the 1970s, the federal government has been steadily increasing its involvement in each of these areas. And hard data show these federal programs have completely failed to improve outcomes.
 
"Take federal education spending. Since 1970, federal spending on K-12 education has increased 375 percent. And over that same time, public school employment has almost doubled while enrollment has stayed the same. So what have federal taxpayers got in exchange for this investment? Nothing. Math and reading scores at the end of high school are unchanged over the past 40 years, while science scores have declined slightly. ...

"The question American voters should ask themselves this November is: Who do you best trust to understand your community's educational and safety needs, your state, local and city governments, or Congress?
 
"For the first 200 years of our republic, local governments made these decisions on their own just fine. Obama needs to explain why expanding the federal government's failed intervention is suddenly necessary."