[LS]

At the time, I wrote that while Roberts' decision was wrong IMHO, his blow against the commerce clause uses was huge. However, I think the question of whether this as a tax "originated in the senate" has been run up the court chain and rejected. I don't see how, constitutionally, but someone correct me if I'm wrong, that has been the ruling.

It will for the next 30 or so years be impossible to know if Roberts was a traitor, a genius who thought he was handing the Congress a constitutional way to eliminate this, or a fool who bungled the law. Most Freepers think the former, but I'm not sure.

All that said, I COMPLETELY disagree with your approach that "well, look at all the bad stuff that happened and opened peoples' eyes." This is trying to win by losing, and is almost always a bad plan. I fail to see how we have gained by having this obscenity now fixed into American law. Yes, horrible laws can be overturned (Sherman Silver Purchase Act, Prohibition), but their destruction is not worth the object lesson.

[Servant of the Cross]

All that said, I COMPLETELY disagree with your approach that "well, look at all the bad stuff that happened and opened peoples' eyes." This is trying to win by losing, and is almost always a bad plan. I fail to see how we have gained by having this obscenity now fixed into American law.

First, I think this is an interesting topic to debate and discuss. I'm not sure whether Roberts is a traitor, a genius or something in between. It is not "my approach" and I don't buy everything the author has written at all.

My primary point is that if SCOTUS had declared 0bamacare unconstitutional in June, 2012, everything that was wrong with 0bamacare would have been blamed on this SCOTUS decision rather than the bad law, the Left would have launched a scorched earth attack on the rule of law and SCOTUS that would have made Bush v Gore look tame, ending in a scenario where we truly "could have lost by winning".