Posted on 06/28/2012 11:50:49 AM PDT by nerdgirl
Chief Justice John G. Roberts is an evil genius. The ruling to uphold the Affordable Care Act is, on its face, a win for President Obama both because the media are saying it is and because it is the signature piece of legislation of his first term. But it may turn out to be a pyrrhic victory, as Roberts accomplished numerous, subtle victories for conservative Republicans.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/john-roberts-evil-genius-article-1.1103982#ixzz1z7DsG4zU
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
“—the Roberts five seek to dismantle the New Deal jurisprudence. With no need to even opine on the Commerce and Necessary and Proper question, Chief Justice Roberts has written an unfathomable opinion whose motive can only be the laying of groundwork—the groundwork to undo the New Deal.”
I would certainly hope the Kossacks are onto something there.
B/S.... Roberts was dead wrong. The law, as written, is unconstitutional.
Ohhhhhhh, I see, Roberts curtailed the expansion of government by allowing it to take over the most important and expansive industry we have. Yes, that makes perfect sense. WHAT???
I’m in tears today knowing that fact, that we are finished!! I don’t feel any sense of hope or feel that Romney will defeat Obama. The USA is finished. I may have a defeatist attitude, but what else am I to feel? We are defeated. It’s over. I’ll still fight, but I don’t feel it matters.
No, not everything. Keep a clear head, especially now that the circus is in town with all the barkers hawking their attractions...along with tons of false prophets.
It seems like they already do tax our behaviors, but they go back door and do it by exemptions. For instance people who have no children pay more tax than people who have children as deductions. This is a round about way of taxing the behavior of remaining childless. All the exemptions are taxes based on not engaging in the exempted behaviors. This makes way for special laws which apply to particular people or groups. The income tax must give way to something better and non intrusive to our private lives.
As Roberts explained in his opinion, being legitimate under the Commerce Clause was the government's main argument. The tax was "and if that doesn't fly, then ...". It seems sensible to address the main argument first. Having found it unconstitutional, he then searched for another construction that could pass constitutional scrutiny.
The ridiculous thing is that the majority rules it "not a tax" for anti-injunction purposes, and then "a tax" for constitutionality. If the Court view the penalty as a "tax", the whole case was mooted by the anti-injunction act.
Halls: either stand your ground or remove your tagline.
“B/S.... Roberts was dead wrong. The law, as written, is unconstitutional.”
...and he certainly knows it. So: Why?
His disjointed ruling is the very definition of judicial activism or reading something into the law that is not there. The court did itself and the country a disservice today.
Avoiding all articles you disagree with isn’t exactly the path to intellectual growth...
My comments today all express profound disappointment with Justice Roberts’ move. And I never said I agreed with this article. For me Roberts jumped the shark this week just as bad with the immigration issue, so it’s not that I’m his grand defender. But nor do I think he’s some kind of “turncoat” or whatever - he surely did what he thought was right, despite the fact that I wish he’d done what was right for the country, and not based on his personal idea of what “right” is.
As I’ve said already, I think he was caught up with preserving the Court as an institution, and perhaps his own ego as well - wanting to protect the “Roberts” Court more than just the Court in general.
But as we are all grasping at straws at how this man could have put the good of the country aside - for any reason - it’s worth reading whatever might shed some light. Attempting to ease the depression one feels at a time like this, I suppose.
” Obama got to Roberts.” <<<
You gotta wonder. I credit no one with enough brains to finesse all this further chaos and author more of this utter confusion except for the devil himself.
Good and decent people should be able to see light at the tunnels end of the tunnel and to see decent outcomes for right and wrong. We can not yet count on right prevailing over the further decline of our once great nation by anyone in government with enough power to reverse decline.
And, we’re going to hope to fix it all by electing now a socialist at the top of our ticket.
We are facilitating a new low.
I totally believe this. I know, I’m fitting my tinfoil hat as I write. Roberts just expanded the governments right to punitively tax us. The commerce cause limitations is bullshit, basically we were given a knife, the rats were given a gun. I have read things in the past about questions into Roberts and his wifes adoption of two children, supposedly from Ireland via South America. As an adoptive mother this smells funky. Where are the investigative reporters?
LOL! It’s like the Japanese just finishing off the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the American commander claiming the Japanese are badly crippled now because we exhausted their supply of 500 lb. bombs. It’s subtle, but if you think about it in the right way, yeah, you won, of course. Arguments by morons for morons.
Well, that’s not what has happened. TV pundits aren’t going to steer you to think straight about today’s ruling. Just wait a while long to decide what the true results are.
As if our objections were to the mere word “mandate”...but hey, call it some other word and we are okay being forced to do it. Sort of like, “Don’t kill me”...but if you just want to take away my life, that’s fine.
Or do we have to wait until tax year 2013 to have standing in order to bring that question before the Supremes?
It's a complete muddle.
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.