Comments on: John Roberts’ act of cowardice

By: westcoastpatriette

westcoastpatriette — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 01:55:14 +0000

who will never agree with any of your arguments defending Roberts’ ruling as conservative — myself included.

I won’t rehash the arguments as they have all been discussed from every angle. Trying to move on, but your defense of Roberts and your reasoning is resurrecting my anger again and I will never be able to see Roberts as anything but a conniving, manipulative, self-serving judge.

You also are buying into the left’s manipulative tactic when you ask if we had “won the war now”, what would we replace it with?

The health care system in America is the best in the world and — other than lifting the restrictions against interstate sale of insurance — did not need “fixing” by the federal government. In fact, the conservative view, IMO, is that most of the problems with the system have been caused by our asinine government and they need to get out of the way and let the free market work.

Roberts’ — had a judicial duty to protect the people from illegal legislation not try to look like the smartest guy in the room. Don’t know why you can’t see that unless it’s just a knee-jerk reaction on your part to defend a colleague.

By: davenj1

davenj1 — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 01:27:04 +0000

conservatives need to look inward a little. We adopted a liberal strategy- relying on the courts to do what could not be achieved legislatively. Leaving aside the issue of the budget reconciliation process- which definitely should be stressed by the Romney campaign as to how the law got passed in the first place- Roberts squarely threw the ball in the election process. It is discouraging to hear some comments out of the Romney camp mincing words about “its a tax/ its a mandate.”
Romney and all conservatives need to constantly remind American voters that Obamacare is a $500 billion tax increase during a fragile economy. Roberts gave Romney the message to run on in 2012.
You could say that we could have won the war right here and now. OK. And replace it with what?
And incidentally, the CBS report about these deliberations are suspect given the secrecy of the Court. Secondly, an analysis of the opinions and the writings tend to indicate that Roberts may have been formulating this tax strategy from day 1. Why would HE resurrect that issue when neither side disputed it? Roberts even appointed a Special Master to argue the case since neither the government nor the opponents of Obamacare wanted to do so. I thought he would use it as a justification to kick the ball down the road to 2014. Little did I or anyone know he would use it to kick the ball into the political arena.

At the end of the day, I hope people feel better calling Roberts a coward, imbecile, traitor, etc. This is a profoundly conservative opinion. Unfortunately, conservatives just don’t know that yet.

By: barleycorn

barleycorn — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:47:15 +0000

Its much easier to emote and angrily accuse John Roberts of cowardice

One reason conservatives have been losing the war since at least 1932 is because they conflate their ideological dogma with the Word of God and demand that all who enter must unfailingly bow to same.

No matter that John Roberts consistently votes with the conservatives and is consistently rated either the 4th or 3rd most conservative member of the current court.

No, he strayed from the reservation on Obamacare so he’s a horrible bum who should resign and then immediately seppuku himself.

By: JX12

JX12 — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 06:00:51 +0000

IMPEACHMENT.

….but wait until next year.

By: 6eorge Jetson

6eorge Jetson — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 01:44:36 +0000

And I am taking the long view. Chief Judas Roberts traded any remaining semblance of the limits of Enumerated Powers for a short-term political play, which may or may not work out for Conservatives.

“Oh, yeah, I’m not regulating you under the Commerce Clause or anything like that, I’m just forcing you to comply by taxing your non-compliance.”

Elected officials are still subject to the need to get reelected. But are not limited to a set of Enumerated Powers.

When the Statists find a way to get elected, the sky is now the limit for what they can impose.

By: hughpecon

hughpecon — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 14:40:19 +0000

Date: August 18, 1821 Thomas Jefferson
The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal judiciary; an irresponsible body, (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into one.

By: darrenperkins

darrenperkins — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 05:09:26 +0000

“What changed the mind of a brilliant legal jurist who felt he understood the intricacies of the law when he first voted to uphold it?” Simple answer. He’s not a brilliant legal jurist. He’s an imbecile. Never be afraid to call a spade for what it is.

By: aesthete

aesthete — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 04:42:02 +0000

The laws overturned in Roe v Wade were state, not federal, laws. They were entirely permissible under the 10th, general state police powers, and violated no Constitutional amendment. Indeed, pro-lifers would argue that they are a mere extension of long-standing government interest in protecting innocents from arbitrary, extra-governmental deprivation of life.

By: aesthete

aesthete — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 04:35:35 +0000

This is directly from Roberts’ opinion:

“CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS announced the judgment of the
Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect
to Parts I, II, and III

By: keepcoolwithcoolidge

keepcoolwithcoolidge — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 04:32:47 +0000

reminds me of Roe v. Wade.