Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 06/29/2012 9:05:02 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Jay Cost joins the merry band of delusional idiots.


50 posted on 06/29/2012 9:39:19 PM PDT by comebacknewt (Newt (sigh) what could have been . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

I am sick of these. Idiots kneepadding roberts. He is a traitor , a thug, a liar, and a snake. He opened a genies bottle allowing the govt to tax viirtuslly any inactivity.

for anyone to spin this to being anything but a disaster is a lie and a fraud.


54 posted on 06/29/2012 9:45:04 PM PDT by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: 2nd wave of attacks on America after 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Once romney is elected there should be a hugh push to demand Roberts resignation.


59 posted on 06/29/2012 9:52:46 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter (Ia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Once romney is elected there should be a huge push to demand Roberts resignation.


61 posted on 06/29/2012 9:53:21 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter (Ia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I'm beginning to suspect that Justice Roberts, the humanitarian that he is, was motivated by a concern for the livelyhoods of the countless commentators and pundits we have nowadays in our fair land, as well as for the excess spare time of all the Internet commentators, such as those starting on this very forum numerous idiotic vanities each consisting of three sentence barely legible passing thoughts.

So you're mad as hell and won't take it any more? Well, start another vanity!


71 posted on 06/29/2012 10:09:33 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

This article is delusional foolishness.

ROBERTS DID NOT CONVINCE A SINGLE LIBERAL JUSTICE TO SUPPORT HIS COMMERCE CLAUSE LIMITATION.

The liberals took what he offered in upholding ObamaCare as a tax, and then spit in his face on his Commerce Clause analysis.

If Obama can appoint one more liberal justice in place of a conservative, then the Commerce Clause limitation is a dead letter, and we will have a fully-fledged central government with unlimited power.

If Roberts REALLY wanted to do the most he could to preserve the Constitution, he should have joined the four conservative justices and in a 5-4 binding precedent, struck down ObamaCare as exceeding constitutional authority.

The liberals might still later on when they get a 5-4 majority simply overturn the precedent, but they would at least have to do it as a naked political power grab flouting the principle of settled precedent instead of pretending to split hairs as will be the case now.


75 posted on 06/29/2012 10:17:03 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; sickoflibs; stephenjohnbanker; NFHale; shibumi; All
The ugly fact is, this decision and betrayal by Roberts not only has upheld the abominable 0bamaCare legislation, it has empowered the executive branch and the effect will be to embolden the institutional fascists who infest both the 'Rat and Republican parties. They are always after more power, and have just received a major truck load of it, thanks to the Roberts Court.

Rush Limbaugh spoke of what 0bamaCare is about, and it is NOT about 'health care', it is about CONTROL of the behavior of our population, and by seizing hold of 'health care', that insures that the federal leviathan will now reach further into our lives, violating our freedoms and liberties in even more insidious ways than we've seen to this point.

Everyone is saying "oh wait, come November we're gonna throw those bums out" or variations on that theme, but nobody seems to be considering exactly what our federal-imperial masters in Washington may attempt between now and the general election, assuming that we still have one.

The beast (meaning the federal government) has just been fed a huge meal of power, authority and license to do damn near anything it wants to do, the Judiciary has abdicated it's role as a Constitutional tripwire, as a restraining muzzle on unbridled federal power, and you can best believe that the Executive and Legislative Branches are going to take advantage of it, and exploit any and all opportunities to exert, extend and increase their power over the lives of their subjects (I say 'subjects' because that is what we have been transformed into with this ruling by the SCOTUS, we are no longer 'citizens' of the United States, we are indeed subjects, living under the benevolence or (more likely) the malevolence of those in control of the federal apparatus in Washington.

Now there is a side of me that would like very much to believe that at the last minute, Roberts was 'given the message' to change his vote "or else" with the 'or else' being an implied trip to Ft. Marcy Park, or to enjoy coffee and donuts with Ron Brown somewhere in the hereafter. IF that occurred, I would be more than disappointed that Roberts didn't tell the bastards to kiss his ass and do their worst, that he would vote as he believed was proper. Unless some sort of SCOTUS mole should begin feeding hidden internal information to the public, we'll never know.

There are eerie parallels so far as the ultimate effect on the 'subjects' (former citizens) in these United States, and the infamous 1933 'Enabling Act' in Germany, in that the authority of the executive branch of government was expanded exponentially due to the political malpractice of government officials who should have known better, but chose the easy path of political expediency for the sake of avoiding confrontation or actually upholding the laws as defined in the respective Constitutions.

Our descent into even deeper and darker fascist waters has just been accelerated.
76 posted on 06/29/2012 10:17:15 PM PDT by mkjessup (Finley Peter Dunne- "Politics ain't beanbag")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Sigh.

Yet another boy abused by John Roberts comes forward.

"Yes, he did disgusting things to me in the shower at the Supreme Court building. But his soap-lathering was so masterful, and he's helped so many other little boys, he surely must have had some real super-secret purpose for what he did."

The only road to recovery goes through admitting you have a problem.

80 posted on 06/29/2012 10:24:22 PM PDT by FredZarguna (When you find yourself arguing against Scalia and Thomas, you AREN'T a conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
... or ...

Battered Conservative syndrome:

"Please officer, don't lock Bob up. He didn't mean to smash my face in. He's really good-hearted. Really he is! It's just sometimes that medication he takes for his epilepsy kicks in and then he just wails on me. Sometimes with a chair. But he really don't mean nuthin' by it."

"It's pro'lly my fault really, officer. I musta did sumthin.' I deserve it. Bob's really not a bad person."

87 posted on 06/29/2012 10:29:25 PM PDT by FredZarguna (When you find yourself arguing against Scalia and Thomas, you AREN'T a conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

It’s a little simplistic, but consider that Liberals and Progressives run for office and get elected with the stated goal of changing government, making it bigger and more powerful. Conservatives run for office and get elected with the vision of government as the Founders envisioned it and maintaining tradition.

Put this way, it’s easy to see how they have an easier job of gaining support to ram through their ideas of change - it’s core to their mission. It’s harder to always play defense, to rally the same amount of support to keep things the same, and much harder to roll things back.


88 posted on 06/29/2012 10:30:31 PM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

94 posted on 06/29/2012 10:41:02 PM PDT by FredZarguna (When you find yourself arguing against Scalia and Thomas, you AREN'T a conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

ROBERTS S A PROGRESSIVE LIKE BUSH AND newt and of course MYTH....


97 posted on 06/29/2012 10:45:39 PM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
For all we know, Roberts could have voted for Obamacare because he had some great grandfather that dropped dead and he thinks making everyone buy insurance could have saved him. So he wrote a tortured, convoluted opinion in an attempt to legitimize his emotional, yet unconstitutional opinion.

There is no room for that on the SC. The other 4 libs are just crazy political hacks.

99 posted on 06/29/2012 10:59:30 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

100 posted on 06/29/2012 11:01:25 PM PDT by FredZarguna (When you find yourself arguing against Scalia and Thomas, you AREN'T a conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
This guy needs to put the crack pipe down!

He will still be claiming a great victory as he's marched into the political realignment camp, never to be seen again.

105 posted on 06/29/2012 11:27:38 PM PDT by precisionshootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Roberts' opinion on the Commerce Clause is obiter dicta. As such, it is not binding precedent.

I fail to see what Roberts has accomplished, other than uphold ObamaCare.

109 posted on 06/29/2012 11:38:01 PM PDT by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Could this ruling be the “Bitch of a Payback” for Obama’s open contempt of the judiciary? His highhanded rhetoric and not so subtle threats?

Perhaps Roberts blatant activist breaking of the constitution was done in order to ensure Obama’s certain defeat in November. Is it possible that this move was made in order to further the destruction of this administrations Justice department and clearly display the lawlessness of this regime’s law enforcement arm?

Stranger things have happened. One can only hope and pray.


110 posted on 06/29/2012 11:42:57 PM PDT by DonnerT (After all is said and done, it is God's Will that will be done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
But there's a counterintuitive case to be made that John Roberts's decision is largely a victory for conservatives.

Right, a decision which sees no problem in the federal government commanding US citizens to buy a product they decide they don't need or want and imposing financial penalties on them if they refuse is largely a victory for conservatives. The crippling debt and insolvency that will result from this insanity is also largely a victory for conservatives. And don't forget the Obama presidency - also largely a victory for conservatives.

Those who can't realize they've been defeated can't possibly learn from defeat. The notion that this catastrophe is somehow a subtle "victory" that will become apparent in 50 or 100 years is delusional - the nation may well bankrupt itself out of existence due to liberal policies while conservatives wait for Roberts' Commerce Clause mumbo-jumbo to magically curb the unrestrained growth of the federal government's intrusions.
113 posted on 06/29/2012 11:51:57 PM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The Weekly Standard

Legal Super GeniusTM John Roberts Just Pulled a Jedi Mind Trick on the Entire United States of America

[And we saw what he did. Oh yeah we did. We saw it. Yeah, that's right. Saw. IT. ]

117 posted on 06/30/2012 12:22:39 AM PDT by FredZarguna (When you find yourself arguing against Scalia and Thomas, you AREN'T a conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
But there's a counterintuitive case to be made that John Roberts's decision is largely a victory for conservatives.

Reminds me of a quote from a famous thespian named Charlie Sheen. "WINNING!"

121 posted on 06/30/2012 12:44:33 AM PDT by ponygirl (Be Breitbart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson