Frankly, I just wish Roberts had ruled with the conservatives...but Epps has a good case here for Obama being "boxed in" just like Jefferson was by Marshall.
Comments?
I am still in shock. Could I still be asleep and this just a bad dream?
Basically Roberts said you get the govt. you elect ,, blame yourselves not me . Maybe he’s suggesting we need a change .
Sorry. You guys are looking for some underlying reasoning behind Roberts decision. The truth is all he’s done is give the Federal Government to power to tax all of us by selecting certain groups of people to punish via the IRS. This is the power to tax any behavior we take or do not take. For anything we purchase or choose not to purchase. For absolutely anything at all. There is nothing objective about this. He stated that the Federal Government had unlimited power to tax us for whatever reason they wanted.
And they do not have to tax us all equally. they can pick and choose whomever they choose to tax.
I’m worried it will take a constitutional convention to correct this evil action on Roberts part. He knew exactly what he was doing. The Feds. will never pass laws to limit their own power to tax now. We are worse off than we were before our first revolutionary war.
ObamaCareTax
Roberts may be crazy like a fox.
This position is nonsense. Roberts didn’t really gut the commerce clause, he eliminated the necessity of using it a a basis for jusrisdiction for any law the Fed. Government wants to pass. From now on congress can pass any law they want just by adding a massive tax for non-compliance. That way they will base jurisdiction on Federal taxing authority rather than the commerce clause. This a massive extension of Federal power and scope.
The States will gather again and sue the Feds for taxing inactivity now that the commerce clause doesn't apply. Roberts redefined it. Now the States can reformulate their lawsuit.
I tend to agree with this somewhat.
Work with me, this is a difficult Machiavellian concept I’m trying to elaborate on here, and I’m not that smart.
Looky here. Had Roberts shot down BeeHOe’s health care, what would the petulant man-child Obama do but what he has done before: Obama would IGNORE the decision and find some convoluted end run around it, thereby making the SCOTUS and any of their subsequent decisions totally NOT RELEVANT.
That would be a Constitutional Crisis of great import.
Like Rush has said, the tyrant would campaign against 4 white guys and an Uncle Tom who snatched free health care out from under their noses. In the ‘stupid’ community, this would be a REALLY big hit.
Now, if Roberts is as smart as I think he is, (hope he is) he would foresee this tyrant’s chess moves in advance, and try to circumvent them.
I think Roberts KNOWS that he has just energized the population like nothing ever seen before. (70%) And that energy is the ONLY thing that will defeat a tyrant like BeeHOe.
He has petted the tyrant, slipped the tyrant’s only campaign issue out from his hand, and handed a card named fury to the 70% who hate obamacare. Also, the tyrant CAN’T rail against a judiciary that just handed him a victory.
And the tyrant is too narcissistic to realize that by allowing himself to be stroked, he has actually lost the game.
Remember Mark Antony, when he began his speech, the mob wanted him dead. When he ended his speech, the mob wanted the whole Senate dead.
Now, I only hope that Judge Roberts is as smart as I think he may be. But then again, I’m just pig farmer from the backwash of Pennsylvania.
What the heck do I know?
One consideration that has been running through my head all day.
We are told that it is discriminatory to require Americans to produce identification to vote. Hey, they might not be able to afford it.
However, wouldn’t the Government need to identify everyone to implement these Health Exchanges? Using an ID of sorts?
Instant voter ID.
I don't know that was his intent. It certainly, however, may be the result of his ruling. And out of everything that has been said (indeed, as I pointed out on another thread, I PREDICTED EXACTLY this outcome . . . in December 2009!), one thing that struck me was Roberts' insistence that the people must control their government, not vice versa. This certainly is something conservatives have been clamoring for for years. I dunno, I'm somewhat warming up to the decision.
btrl
btrl
This article is interesting, especially in light of a thought that popped into my mind this morning as I was listening to the reports and initial rants against Justice Roberts. I was shocked and dismayed at the ruling and thinking derogatory thoughts about Roberts, whom I’ve seen as a conservative.
And then I got this thought popped into my mind: “Something else is at play here. Roberts is setting something up that is currently hidden.” And I had a sense of calmness afterward about the decision.
This article that Roberts playing a larger political game than is obvious at first glance at the ruling seems to me to be a possibility of the thought I got. Or it may be nothing at all other than a desparate subconscious wish for an over turning of Obamacare and his re-election defeat.