Posted on 05/26/2013 8:42:41 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
The decision to keep the bureaucrat who headed up Tea Party targeting in charge of Obamacare speaks to a bald affront by the Obama administration to a US Congress now facing some very tough questions of its own. Sarah Hall Ingram scored not a lateral but an up the chain promotion when she was put in charge of a reform division of the Affordable Care Act. But just what are the political ramifications of the 18 month long period in which the painful targeting of conservatives successfully squelched Tea Party opposition to her big boss’s re-election?
The Tea Party targeting scandal has called into question the role which the IRS and thousands of new agents will play as they become healthcare auditors and decision makers for millions of Americans under Obamacare. And now some analysts are going back to re-examine the amazing Affordable Care Act flip flop of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
The Constitution makes it clear that Congress alone may...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
He might well answer that his ploy to put the legislation into the status of a tax bil was a stroke of genius.
1.The Dems had majorities in both houses and the Presidency. They could pass anything they wanted to.
2.Taking the issue out of the status of government run healthcare out of the claim for it as a ‘human right and putting it into a tax bill makes it easily repealable when the flaws become obvious as a ‘scourge.”
3.Letting Obamacare go forward would do nothing but allow it to implode because of the inherent flaws in the concept, the cost, and the contradiction between the utopian ideal pushed by the liberal mindset and reality.
4. Once this Frankenstein monster stumbles and crashes to the ground, it will not be resurrected for generations, if ever. Remember that the greatest change and the greatest tax burden will fall on the young between 18-30 who were previously uninsured but relied on the county health systems for care when needed. How many parents in blue collar homes are going to pay for insurance for their kids up to age 26? This is a huge tax burden on the poor and lower middle class who were previously not affected directly in their pocketbooks for healthcare.
Blackmailed?: http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/05/16722-was-chief-justice-roberts-blackmailed-into-supporting-obamacare-maybe/
Good luck with that .
Same thing happened after WW2 in UK.
The Labor party under Attlee told the homecoming troops they would all get a National Health System (NHS)...and Churchill was defeated and the Labor party took over...
Promptly nationalized electricity, gas, coal mining, railways etc.
and the British are still suffering under the NHS after 60+ years.
For an idea how it works...Google "Liverpool Pathway Controversy"
It means that the vetting committee for Roberts didn’t do their job.
What if he was blackmailed just before the decision?
John Roberts = Mole ?
It’s impossible to believe that Obama and his corrupt Chicago-mafia-ruled administration did NOT try to bribe and threaten John Roberts to change his ObamaCare vote to their liking. That’s what Chicago politicians DO — threaten and bribe.
And it’s also impossible to believe that the heretofore reliably Conservative, previously honorable John Roberts did NOT suddenly succumb to the Obama administration’s bribery and threats when he did a complete about-face, turned traitor to his fellow Conservative justices, and voted as the Obama administration wished.
The MSM may not be interested in this, but future historians will be, and Justice Roberts is going to have a lot of ‘splainin’ to do if he doesn’t want to unseat Roger Taney from his perch as the worst Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in American history.
Knowing what we know about Roberts and his adoption shenanigans, he must have been blackmailed either overtly or covertly, I have little doubt about it.
Ploy my ###. There was no stroke of genius just a coward getting his.
And by the way, it's not his job to ploy.
Why some want to suck up to a traitor I'll never know.
He had an obligation not to take the job if he was "black-mail-able." If he's a closeted gay, he shouldn't have taken the job. If he illegally adopted his children, he shouldn't have taken the job.
Selfish ####, he is. Millions of people are paying the price for him. Some literally with their lives while he brunches with Lois Lerner.
Let me try to be clear on this. John Roberts had no choice.
Had he voted against Obamacare, justice Kennedy would jump and vote with the liberals, and Obamacare, with all its evil trimmings, would become law. The whole thing, set in concrete.
Justice Kennedy does this, every time a real major case for the left is decided. He only does the “swing vote” thing of voting with the conservatives when it is unimportant.
Because Roberts was the 5th vote, however, Kennedy does not get in the law books, and he was enraged at Roberts about it. Kennedy wanted to be “the great swing vote”.
So Roberts had no choice, he *had* to vote for it. But why?
Because one of the few things the Chief Justice can do, that the other justices cannot, is, if he votes for the majority, he can select *who* writes the opinion of the court. And he chose himself to do so, to write the opinion.
Sabotage. By voting with the majority, Roberts could and did sabotage Obamacare, and possibly even *more* than Obamacare. The liberal side of the court *had* to agree to this, because if they hadn’t, one of them would have been crucified by the left “for overturning Obamacare”. They are far too cowardly to do that, as they would never be invited to a cocktail party again. They would be traitors, outcasts, to the left.
What did Roberts do?
1) He very clearly said that the individual mandate was unconstitutional as a “regulation”. It was a *tax*.
If the individual mandate was a regulation, and the Republicans controlled congress and the presidency, which eventually they will; the Democrats could and would *block* changing Obamacare in any way, unless the Republicans got a 2/3rds majority in the US senate, which is highly unlikely.
But constitutionally, taxes *cannot* be blocked by the minority, and only take a simple majority, 51%, to change.
So Roberts made it *easy* for a Republican simple majority in congress and the POTUS, to KILL Obamacare. And there is nothing the Democrats can do to stop them.
So Obamacare is dead already, unless the Republicans wimp out.
2) But the *real* Roberts sabotage was a wonder to behold.
“Ol’ Frank Roosevelt based his New Deal on ridiculous extrapolations of the Interstate Commerce Clause. Lyndon B. Johnson created his “Great Society” welfare state based on the “General Welfare clause” in the US constitution. And the Democrats tried to use the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause to justify Obamacare.
Roberts said extrapolating the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause to do that was unconstitutional. Importantly, when you add the dissenting justices in this decision, there were five votes on the Court for a *more* restrictive view of the Commerce Clause.
Since Roosevelt, the Commerce Clause has been used as Congress’ default authority to do almost anything. So Roberts has demonstrated that there are now five members of the Supreme Court who are willing to overturn abuses going back almost 75 years!
He has set the stage for the SCOTUS to overturn vast amounts of federal law, eliminate huge amounts of bureaucracy, in ways not imaginable just a few years ago.
Was Roberts threatened by the IRS?
Funny, it wasn’t that long ago that more than a few “conservative” pundits were claiming that Roberts has powerful, mystical kung fu Constitutional insight that led to his decision on punting Obamacare down our throats.
You might have a good point—but only if you have an absolute correlation between a war weary England which had always had a stong socialist tradition and powerful labor unions with the U.S. today with a country that is still a center right nation.
My theory is that the inevitable failure of Obamacare will put the liberals and their utopian ideas in the political wilderness for years, once it sinks into the low-info voter that they’ve been screwed.
You have a very warped sense here.
Fine by you to let some innocent person or persons take the hit for Robert’s indiscretions.
Just let Traitor John enjoy all the caviar and champagne he wants.
Suckers one and all.
So what if he was? Then he needs to be a F^&%ing man, go out on the supreme court steps and say he is being blackmailed over his homosexual past, and the shady way he adopted his kids.
He needs to say exactly who threatened him, and how.
The blackmail loses its power when he owns up to whatever secret of his they found out about.
Maybe it ruins his life, maybe it ruins his marriage and career. So what? Hundreds of thousands of American fighting men have given their very life rather than betray our country. So why is the sacrifice of his personal life in defense of our very freedom so unreasonable to ask?
Besides, if he did that press conference on the steps, he would actually be worthy of respect at that moment no matter what was in his past.
If he had a homo past, or found ways to break the rules in adopting his kids, or whatever,,one fact remains. When someone tried to blackmail him, he had a choice. Either do what was right no matter the consequences to him personally, or keep his past hidden by deciding to screw our freedom.
Roberts became a traitor the instant he submitted to the blackmail. A man would do the right thing no matter the consequences personally. Fighting men do it every day, and often pay with their very lives.
At worst, his embarrassing past would have come out, and he would have faced life as a multimillionaire celebrity.
Actually...it’s the fault of our entire culture...much of which we have all supported in various degrees in the last 40-50 years. Overall, God was largely ignored by that culture.
Unfortunately, I don’t think a large part of our citizenry has learned this yet.
I am convinced that Roberts is homosexual.
Geez, our first clue might be that some people are totally clueless about politics and especially the history of politics in this country—but fortunately are still allowed the benefit of free speech guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to spread misinformation.
FYI Roberts was installed as Supreme Court Justice in 2005, the same year that Obama took a seat in the Senate as an unknown and obscure back-bencher. Obama voted against his confirmation. Now that is a really tricky ploy to get him into the S.Ct.
If John Roberts had believable explanations for why he suddenly changed his ObamaCare views at the last minute, his fellow Conservative justices — Scalia, Thomas, and Alito — would have believed them.
However, the Conservative justices were angry and mystified by his reversal; they felt betrayed, and they apparently still do.
In any case, the responsibility of Supreme Court justices is to interpret laws such as ObamaCare to determine if they are Constitutional, not to plot ways to use individual cases to narrow or expand Constitutional provisions such as the Commerce Clause for application to future cases.
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.