“Bottom line, the ruling hurts Obama. A rejection would have hurt him , too. But upholding on the commerce clause would have helped him. IMO.”
That’s not the bottom line at all. The bottom line is we have a lawless Supreme Court, or at least a Chief Justice with no respect for the limits the Constitution places on government power. Either way, maybe it’s great for the Romney campaign, but it’s a sad day for our constitution, our republic, and our nation.
Look deeper folks, has the 08 bailout acually reconciled the balance sheets of the 15 trillion ones, over the Troglites?
No, and the original lobby authors, are going to absolutely drive the nails so that a group that calls itself an “indusry”, equity holders of the banking sector, have direct leverage anytime they want, BUT WITHOUT EVER NEEDING EVER TO GO THROUGH CONGRESS TO HAVE A VOTE AGAIN, as they were forced to in 08.
I actually agree with you. I think Roberts should have voted with the conservatives. After all, we’re the ones that put him there.Paradoxically, I’m glad we’re on offense on this issue going into the campaign, because Obama had already signaled he was all set to run against the Supreme Court. I’d still rather have Roberts on the Court than the two or three justices the next Presidential term would give Obama a chance to appoint, very likely including Kennedy.