Showing posts with label John Roberts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Roberts. Show all posts

Thursday, January 2, 2014

Did Supreme Court Justice Roberts "set a trap" for Obamacare?...

Bill Dunn over at American Thinker thinks so.

Bill Dunn is virtually smacking his lips at the cleverness of John Roberts who, in his wisdom, saw the upcoming debacle known as Obamacare.  Supposedly, according to Dunn, he (Roberts) could in some last minute burst of light foresee that the roll out of Obamacare was going to be a disaster which would  doom the Democrats, Obama, and the future political career of Hillary Clinton. 
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.  read the rest
Bill Dunn also believes in unicorns and flying pigs.  Okay - not really.  I think Mr. Dunn is a bright guy who really, really wants to believe that Roberts was really, really looking out for the future of the American people.  Maybe such optimism should be applauded.

I've never been overly impressed with Roberts as a deep thinker.  And in no way can he be considered "clever" or "shifty."  There are many other reasons that are way more plausible for him changing his vote on Obamacare at the last moment.

And a further note to those who think Obamacare "will collapse on it's own?"  Think again.  The feds will keep throwing more borrowed Chinese money at this monstrosity until China no longer gives us any more which, in my opinion, will probably be very soon. 

Mr. Dunn also envisions a world where the people will rise up in rebellion against the overreach of the federal government.  No, they won't.  Does anyone really believe that the sheeple who are receiving Section 8 housing, food stamps to help feed their illegitimate children, free cell phones, and free health care through Medicaid are going to suddenly become freedom fighting patriots? 

Or the ignorant libtards sipping their soy lattes at some overpriced urban coffee house are going to wake up and smell some "real" coffee and realize that they've been duped - that they are, indeed, the useful idiots of this century?  Not going to happen.

Both groups of people are invested in their ignorance.  The takers want to keep taking - it's their "right", doncha know, and the useful idiots must, at all costs, protect the vision of themselves as the elite thinkers, the people who really care about other people, animal rights, and global warming. 

In the meantime, people will suffer and some will die.  But, at this point what difference does it make?

The wise will have extra oil for their lamps.  The foolish will miss the wedding.

Which will you be?



Monday, July 2, 2012

Was Roberts threatened...

or was he merely worried about his "legacy?"

I've yet to see one person bring up the possibility that Roberts may have been threatened in some way.  Why is that such a stretch considering the lawless Chicago thugs we're dealing with?

Anyone who thinks threats don't go hand-in-hand with graft and corruption is not paying attention.


 Bruce McQuain:

 ObamaCare: The fallout
I’ve read all the pundits and listened to all the talking head elite tell us how incredibly nuanced and subtle the Chief Justice was by approving the law as a tax.  In fact one described him as “"a chess master, a statesman, a Burkean minimalist, a battle-loser but war-winner, a Daniel Webster for our times."

I say “BS”.  He sold out.  He ended up being more worried about the perception of the court and his legacy than upholding the Constitution of the United States.  And I’m not the only one who feels that way.  The Wall Street Journal also throws a punch or two at Roberts:  read the rest

Friday, June 29, 2012