Posted on 07/01/2012 10:47:39 AM PDT by Kaslin
Roberts sold the country out. Whether it was because of a carrot or a stick (threats and intimidation are usually all Obama’s people know) is only peripherally relevant.
My money is on fear. These are Hitler-esque thugs in the White House.
Do I sympathize with Roberts? NO. He shouldn’t be on the bench if he’s not willing to stand up to Obama’s thugs. This is the kind of crap we see all over the 3rd world. And now it’s business as usual in our country.
Anyone betting on a President Romney and Republican Senate to repeal ObamaCare would be better off playing roulette.
Not necessarily. One justice told her that there’s a defection about once a year, but the other claims are not directly tied to anybody specific.
I don’t buy that Roberts changed his mind a month ago though. I think this is trying to make it seem that Roberts didn’t hate the decision he ended up reading. The report that his eyes were red and he was visibiy unhappy while reading “his” decision suggests otherwise though. And the opinions read as if nobody had time to change their arguments to reflect the final vote. For instance, the dissent doesn’t rebut the majority opinion, as is usual. And it refers to Ginsburg’s opinion as the dissent rather than the majority. If Roberts had changed his mind a month ago the opinions would/should have been adjusted to reflect that.
I think the media is realizing it is too obvious that Roberts changed his vote on this, and they are spinning to make it appear that it was something Roberts deliberated about long and hard - not at the last minute as a result of threats. Again, though, the red eyes and unhappy demeanor when Roberts read the decision doesn’t fit that story very well. And if there was a bitter, month-long deliberation to try to get Roberts to change his mind back to overturning Obamacare, I would expect the dissent to drill home those points. But they didn’t. And I would expect at least one of the conservative justices to give a scathing dissent that they read out loud. But Scalia’s scathing dissent was used up on Monday with the AZ decision.
I think we’ve entered the spin zone. The media has to acknowledge that Roberts changed his vote but they desperately want to make us believe it wasn’t because of threats.
And they’re using unnamed sources to make the claim, while briefly mentioning a justice as a source for a different claim.
Mine too!
Yes, she does.
To hell with the law, to hell with the Constitution, to hell with America... John Roberts is more concerned about John Roberts than anything else. “Look at me, everybody! I’m John Roberts, and I really shocked everybody, didn’t I, huh, huh, didn’t I? Look at me, everybody, look at ME!”
He’s the new David Souter, and he can never be trusted again.
What a scumbag.
Someone here on FreeRepublic speculated this was the case by citing an odd passage in the dissent in which it refers to Ginsberg’s opinion as a “dissent” when in fact it was part of the majority opinion.
If he was threatened, I am thinking - as a previous FRer had noted- that it was about the adoptions of his two children.
If so, ‘out’ the adoption. Who, what, why, where, when. Get to the bottom of those adoptions. Find out what may have been used against him or be prepared to bend over with many more rulings like that compliments of Roberts.
“Im more and more convinced that he was threatened in a way that had teeth.”
That’s the only thing that makes sense to me.
The reasoning was too tortured and inconsistent with any approach Roberts has used in the past.
May be clutching at straws but I agree with you.
We should never have gotten to the point in this country that our future came down to one elite sitting in an office who was personally going be unaffected personally by the health care legislation he approved as constitutional.
Exactly! My husband takes those,too. I can assure you - he has NOT become a liberal or lost his ability to think. Do you have Trigeminal Neuralgia? (i hope not)
((((Hugs))))
So glad to hear your good news!!
Roberts knows his decision is being reviled. I see no way that he would choose this vote in order to have a legacy.
Personally, I think Roberts knew damn well that ObamaCare is unconstitutional but couldn't come to grips with the idiocy of the legal arguments that were brought in this particular case. For example, if I were a Supreme Court justice I'd be asking myself how I could have Attorneys General from 28 states filing legal briefs to overturn ObamaCare when it had originally been passed in the U.S. Senate by a 60-39 margin.
John Roberts, Harvard College, Harvard Law School, Managing Editor of the Harvard Law Review....
Sound familiar???
You should see the anger in the hallways of citizens who love their liberty...
Exactly. But there is no clear reason as to why he changed his mind. what does O Team have on Roberts????
Well they've been using for decades already.
There were warnings in 1912 about this when the 16th amendment was being debated. It took one hundred years before congress went far enough that a large number of people finally noticed.
This is too funny. As much as men on this site like to complain about women getting the right to vote as the downfall of this country, what’s not brought up enough is the spineless, chicken-hearted men who are running this nation into the ground. Just sayin’...
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.