The chief justice is a good man, whose record over the whole of his career will probably be a good one, perhaps even a great one. However, I do not agree with this opinion. I believe the dissent got it right.
Posted on 07/05/2012 1:42:07 PM PDT by Charles Henrickson
The chief justice is a good man, whose record over the whole of his career will probably be a good one, perhaps even a great one. However, I do not agree with this opinion. I believe the dissent got it right.
The same thing was said about Cesar. (It didn't end well.)
Obama and the left have been proven correct in one thing - the court is political and activist. The good news is and has been that sovereign states can choose to ignore rulings from this politicized, activist and cowed group of political appointees. Those of us who agree with original intent are free to relocate and seek liberty in those states which can prove their adherence to republicanism. * see tagline
Well, there it is for all the Pollyannas around here.
Nope.
Justice Roberts will always be remembered for this assinine opinion that affects over 20% of our economy. His record will never be considered great.
Nope.
Justice Roberts will always be remembered for this assinine opinion that affects over 20% of our economy. His record will never be considered great.
Jury box of liberty .... CLOSED.
Because this was a mandate....no, a tax, ...er....a penalty, Roberts should have erred on the side of the Constitution because of it's ambiguity - individual freedom and limited government.
He chose group think and the biggest government power grab since the New Deal.
He should do the right thing - wait, and then resign in disgrace.
Those of us who agree with original intent are free to relocate and seek liberty in those states which can prove their adherence to republicanism.
Sorry, but the only opt out refers to medicaid extension, and has nothing to do with the rest of the law.
I prefer this much more critical quote from the article:
“But the majority opinion appears to be a result looking for a rationale, which is the antithesis of what I ever thought would be the approach of John Roberts. One of his new admirers described his opinion as “incoherent but brilliant”. That’s the most depressing thing I have read in a long time.”
“A result looking for a rationale...”
The question still hangs out there - WHY???
This is another concerted effort (second round, I guess) to repair Roberts' reputation. With the Tyrrell's article today, Roberts = Fox, it is as if THE POWER THAT BE decreed that rubes on the right should appreciate this turd sammich.
Just like the concerted effort to NOT QUESTION Obama's natural born status last time around.
Wow! The silver-lining garbage again. I am sick and tired of these arrogant elites trying their best to paper over this evil ruling.
This is the same Fred Thompson who is supporting NPV (National Popular Vote) movement. Hey Freddy boy do you even know why the Founders put the Electoral College mechanism into the United States Constitution?
NPV is just another deathblow to the United States Constitution supported by Fred Thompson.
Because of NPV alone Fred Thompson should be dead to any true Conservative.
Uh...hey Fred. 56% of the population is now collecting some kind of free handout. What's THAT tell you about this asinine idea?
Term limits for EVERYONE in Washington. None of them are able to see outside the beltway. They become citizen blind.
Do you think the Justices actually read the 2700 page Bill? Nobody in Congress did.
Only the lawyers that write the regulations used to prosecute/persecute the people will be reading it.
Hate to say it but it appears most of the Republicans in office or running for office are as despicable as this looser.
God help the republic
Roberts’ ruling, while we don’t respect the convoluted reasoning on which it was issued, does provide us with three positives. They are: 1) It was ruled applicable as a tax, not as a function of the commerce clause. 2) It can be repealed by a majority of both chambers of congress, not requiring 60 senate votes. 3) Since is was ruled as a tax, it can still be ruled as unconstitutional. This tax cannot be litigated against until it goes into effect. I’m going to assume that a tax that is not being paid to a governmental entity is unconstitutional, since the taxes will go to the existing healthcare agencies, this may prove to be its downfall.
The ruling also provides conservatives with the following benefits. 1) It puts Obama in the position of taxing the American people, something he claimed it didn’t do. 2) It provides great motivation for conservatives to show up at the polls. 3) It puts congressional democrats under more pressure than if the law had been overturned. It could cause the senate to go republican.
My take on this is that Roberts wanted to f**k with Obama, kind of like pulling wings off a fly and letting it squirm.
Considering the fact that Thompson is a national popular vote pimp, I can’t help but question his judgement on most other things.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.