Posted on 01/03/2014 4:49:02 PM PST by Kaslin
One of the most overlooked aspects of the year just ended is the vindication of Chief Justice John Roberts -- a vindication that showed up as the national catastrophe known as ObamaCare got rolling. Roberts may have also doomed Hillary Clinton's chance to live in the White House again.
The chief justice, an appointee of President George W. Bush and reputedly a constitutionalist in his jurisprudence, set his diabolical trap (diabolical to Democrats) on June 28, 2012, when he joined with the four liberal justices on the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutionality of ObamaCare. Conservatives and Republicans across the land were apoplectic. But in hindsight, it appears that Roberts actually saved the Republican Party from going into a death spiral and imperiled the Democrats instead. This suggests amazing foresight, but it wouldn't be the only instance.
For example, Tevi Troy, a scholar at the Hudson Institute, made a remarkable prophecy a year and a half before the Court's decision. It was soon after the November 2010 midterm elections, in which Democrats in Congress and in state legislatures suffered huge losses. In an article in Commentary magazine, Troy wrote:
The Pyrrhic victory Democrats secured for themselves [when President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law] may prove not to have been a victory at all but rather an ever-roiling, ongoing, and recurring act of political and ideological self-destruction.
How's that for prescience?
When the Supreme Court ruling came down, a shocked conservative historian, Paul Rahe, cited as a cause the PR pressure that President Barack Obama had been exerting on the Court in the fevered weeks leading up to the decision. It was "an act of judicial cowardice," he fumed. But then he added, "There is, I am confident, more to it than this."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Roberts?
Shouldn't you be strumming a banjo and sipping whiskey out of a Mason jar?
Do you really think Snowden has relevant E-mails? If he does, I wish he would release them .
I don’t think you can consider something the supreme court decides as unconstitutional.
That’s their job, they are the final authority (besides ball and musket).
If that’s what it takes to get people to hear the gospel, yes.
God never stopped intending our good. It’s we who stopped wanting to receive it.
All this might be good if the Democrat’s death grip on the vote count can be sprung before November. The dems control the counting of votes from the touch screen voting machines and the other varieties of electronic voting machines are eminently hackable. The right doesn’t do that to any extent. The left does it as SOP.
“I don’t think you can consider something the supreme court decides as unconstitutional.”
I just did. When the oath is taken, it is taken to the ideas, not to Dred Scott or Plessy v Ferguson or Roe v Wade. Taken to the logical conclusion, five members of the court can declare one member Emperor , and all attempts to impeach are hereby unconstitutional.
I think Obozocare will end up back before the Supreme Court, but this time arguing the origination clause.
Violation of the origination clause would kill Obozocare outright, not allowing portions to survive a challenge.
Dr. Hotze here in Texas filed a lawsuit back in May of 2013 challenging ACA on two grounds. This bill originated in the senate, not the house.
Secondly, Obamacare’s employer mandate violates the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment. It bars the federal government from requiring citizens to transfer their “wealth directly to others without a ‘public use,’” the lawsuit says. Governments can't require people to do business with other people.
If this ends up back before the SCOTUS and fails the constitutional challenge on these two grounds...Robert's will have pulled off a brilliant tactic.
For more on this, take a look at the link. Lotsa info.
http://www.hotzevobamacare.com/news/
Thank you for posting that link, I really appreciate it. I missed it when you originally posted.
I took the time to read it all the way through and intend to read it again. I learned quite a bit. I see John Roberts differently now. Every American should read that.
Thanks again.
The SCOTUS ruled Obamacare was a tax.
The Congress labels Obamacare as the implementation of healthcare as a human right.
Why do the Democrat Socialists demand we tax the rights of the people?
Rights aren’t taxable.
Ergo, Obamacare may not be funded by taxation.
You are exactly right. Roberts is supposed to determine constitutionality, not play politics. But at the same time, the authors reasoning is as convoluted as Roberts’ reasoning was. I don’t believe for a minute this is what happened.
Roberts was just imitating his “boss”, GWB.
No you didn't. You just laughably asserted it was unconstitutional. Imagine that, the constitution is unconstitutional. That's about the bottom line of your argument.
Since the penalty was ruled a tax, and tax legislations is supposed to originate in the House not the Senate, I thought there was a lawsuit against it on that basis?
in the meantime how many people will die and how much money will have been wasted implementing this garbage?
There is.
So Roberts violated his oath and the Constitution to save the GOP. In other words, the system doesn’t work unless someone cheats.
Is it also true that the citizens of those States that chose not to set up exchanges and/or expand Medicaid can’t be charged the penalty (tax)?
When, next this law comes before the high court they will again adjudicate on the law, but which law? The law as passed by the Congress or the law as it is being enforced now. Obama is doing things that are not allowed for in the ACA.
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.