“I looked at your posting history and see that you were totally silent at FR in the last 2 months so you didn’t stick your neck out on this at all.”
a) I’ve had things more important going on in my life than coming on to Free Republic to speculate about what the Supreme Court would decide.
b) Why should I make a prediction and “stick my neck out” when I had NO IDEA how they would rule? They ruled. Now I’m here to voice my opinion about it and read other people’s opinions.
c) Pretending that the frequency with which a person expresses his opinion has anything at all to do with the validity of his opinion is, at best, ignorant, and at wost, dishonest, offensive and evil.
“Why did only the “kook” get this one right?”
In fact, numerous Democrats “got this right” and predicted Roberts would vote this way. For much simpler reasons such as that he believed it to be the correct decision.
In my opinion, the only people who REALLY got it right were those who said, “We don’t know what will happen, because we don’t know what is going on inside those nine heads.” Not entirely true, because roughly six of the judges are 100% predictable. Lots of people, you included, guessed right. Lots of people, you not included, guessed wrong. Guessing right doesn’t prove your reasoning to be right.
And I have far more respect for the people who said “I think that most likely (x) will be the outcome because I think that Judges (y and z) believe (a and b)” as opposed to anyone who said “I know that (x) will be the outcome because I know for a fact that Judge (y) is being coerced by a conspiracy involving evil villain (z) and those dastardly ideological organizations (a and b).”
In such cases, it is irrelevant who ends up correctly guessing the outcome. One is making a reasonable guess, whereas the other is discarding reason in favor of fanciful speculation.
You’re speculating about me. All I noted was that since you haven’t posted here in the last 2 months I didn’t see you stick your neck out on this. Stop assigning arguments to me that I never made.
I also never said that I definitely knew what was going to happen. I said that I suspected that Roberts was compromised because of x, y, and z and that I feared he would uphold Obamacare because he was told he had to. I loudly hoped that I was mistaken.
The guy upheld Obamacare using unlimited-government arguments that even Justice Kennedy saw past. And he looked and acted absolutely miserable when he did it.
Ya know, I could hold Ginsburg hostage and then as a solid conservative predict that she would vote to overturn Roe v Wade just because she’s such a reasonable person and would make the right decision. That wouldn’t be fishy at all. No, not at all. And if Ginsburg voted to overturn Roe v Wade after all these years of being a rabidly liberal pro-choicer, well... Occam’s Razor would say it was because she just thought it was the right thing to do...
The DEMS were predicting that Roberts - who was this evil right-wing creature - would miraculously see the light on this issue alone, even though Kennedy wouldn’t even see it that way? That, by itself, would make me question their reasoning. Maybe you can show me where they predicted these things so I can see what kind of reasons they used. For instance, when has Roberts ruled that Congress could make any purchasing demands it wanted on civilians and then punish people for not doing it, as long as the fine was rationalized to be a “tax”? Did they bring up Roberts’ response to that argument when the government lawyer made it in the hearing? Did Roberts respond positively to that line of argument? What is their reasoning?
In fact, what is YOUR reasoning? What leads you to believe that Roberts was simply convinced by the sheer brilliance of the Obama regime’s arguments? I thought there were a lot of liberals who were ready to cream the lawyer because he was so pathetic and it was so obvious to everybody that his arguments were worthless. If even the liberal news people were shaking their heads at how pathetic it was, it would take a bit to show me that Roberts was overwhelmed by the brilliance of the arguments made.