So, here is the skuttlebutt: John Roberts decided to protect the Court and get a little payback by ensuring Mitt Romney would be our next President.
How?
Let ObamaCare live, let the entire American voting public know it is a tax, energize the Conservative base of the R Party and the real Tea Party voting block to ensure the Enthusiasm Gap is closed by Mitt and not Obama. He handed the big, steaming pile of ObamaCare right back to the President so he could choke on it.
Pretty darned slick theory.
To accept it one would have to take the position that John Roberts was willing to use his position as no other Chief Justice has ever done before, to take out a sitting President, by any means necessary.
It would explain all of the quirks...
Kerodin
III
3 more takes.
ReplyDeletehttp://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2012/06/chief-justice-roberts-is-genius.html
Well if he is trying to set up Obama then Roberts is certainly a gambler. It could backfire because the election is much to close for any real issues caused by the legislation to hit. Obama supporters may get energized as well and assume he is a winner by this.
ReplyDeleteI see it as "Prepare for ramming speed!"
ReplyDeleteRoberts may have did his FU to Obama, but he also set a precedent that anything (including not doing anything) can be fined as log as it is a tax.
Obama and the democrats are on record as saying the mandate was not a tax though. I will give Roberts that.
I'm waiting to see how the tax issue gets narrowed - IF it gets narrowed in a future case.
DeleteK
Wtf difference does it make anyway?
ReplyDeleteNot a bit. ;)
DeleteBut I will not be disappointed if time proves Roberts is genuinely respectful of the Constitution.
K
I dunno, man.
ReplyDeleteI think to believe this theory one has to dislocate a shoulder stretching THAT far.
I do think it was some damn fine fancy lawyerin' though...
Bastards.
It will spin-up the folks who put a lot of value in SCOTUS and conventional politics.
DeleteK
Wait, let me get this right: First its a bad thing Obamacare was deemed constitutional, because its obviously tainted with socialism. Now its a good thing cause theres a chance it may keep Obama from being reelected.
ReplyDeleteThe reality is though, IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER! Obamacare has been instituted by someone who sees themselves above the constitution.
Regardless of the how this will effect Obama, it is the American people who will feel the harsh consequences of this socialist law.
So what if it keeps Obama from being reelected, is Romney really going to be any better? Don't think so. Truth of the matter is, no matter how this turns out, we're the ones getting bent over the barrel.
Steel yourselves men, the worst is yet to come!
RedWulf
Now we'll see if the Republicans actually live up to their rhetoric and repeal.
DeleteIt is all theater, Sparklies and violins as the Titanic goes down.
But watching it all amuses me. ;)
K
Mr.K,
ReplyDeleteI paint this essay as BULLSHIT ! Roberts supposedly screwed soetoro-obama by bending over 330 million Americans ?
BULLSHIT !
DAN III
Pennsylvania
Dan: Remember that Roberts didn't bend anyone over - RomneyCare & ObamaCare did that, as well as all the politicians who voted for it and all the voters who voted for those politicians.
DeleteRoberts is not a hardcore Constitutionalist who sees things exactly as do I, but for anyone who subscribes to the concept that Judicial Review is the Court's responsibility AND is in the Conservative/Neo-Con camp has to see this as a win.
I think it is all meaningless theatre, but that doesn't mean I don't like a good show. ;)
K
The spinmeisters are busy working overtime... here them now...
ReplyDelete"This is a great decision! It's 2010 all over again! The Tea Party will be revived! It will cost Obama the election! It will guarantee Romney the White House! Dems lose, Repubs win! Yay!"
Of course, never mind that Romney created this monstrosity to begin with, never mind that the 2010 elections produced ZILCH, never mind the Tea Party accomplished ZILCH, never mind that the Repubs are just as bad as the Dems...
Let's see - Clinton wants his Omnibus Crime Act, can't get it passed, then after 911 VOILA! The Shrub gets it passed renamed as the PATRIOT Act! A Republican governor creates socialist medical 'care' in his state, the Democrat POTUS expands it nationwide, and this horrible deed helps guarantee the Republican governor a shot at POTUS himself.
No wonder our country is so fubar'd. We are living in the days of insanity.
Anon: Most of us know we are on a terminal course at speed sufficient to make a pretty good crater.
DeleteNo matter what SCOTUS ruled, nothing will change that course and speed.
But I can appreciate a good political FU, and that is what was served yesterday.
K
It's actually good to see this discussion here, because it is an attempt to go beyond the surface 'group think' foisted on both left and right.
ReplyDeleteThis is a time for careful consideration and observation. If, what some say, (like this guy) that Roberts actually screwed POTUS, Congress and the DNC, the issue will become taxes. Period. I saw this take on it, and it provides a bit of clarity:
http://whitehouse12.com/2012/06/28/chief-justice-roberts-is-a-genius/
Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius
Posted on June 28, 2012 by I.M. Citizen
Before you look to do harm to Chief Justice Roberts or his family, it’s important that you think carefully about the meaning – the true nature — of his ruling on Obama-care. The Left will shout that they won, that Obama-care was upheld and all the rest. Let them.
It will be a short-lived celebration.
Here’s what really occurred — payback. Yes, payback for Obama’s numerous, ill-advised and childish insults directed toward SCOTUS.
Chief Justice Roberts actually ruled the mandate, relative to the commerce clause, was unconstitutional. That’s how the Democrats got Obama-care going in the first place. This is critical. His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be.
Next, he stated that, because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must, to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax. Therefore, the mechanism that funds Obama-care is a tax. This is also critical. Recall back during the initial Obama-care battles, the Democrats called it a penalty, Republicans called it a tax. Democrats consistently soft sold it as a penalty. It went to vote as a penalty. Obama declared endlessly, that it was not a tax, it was a penalty. But when the Democrats argued in front of the Supreme Court, they said ‘hey, a penalty or a tax, either way’. So, Roberts gave them a tax. It is now the official law of the land — beyond word-play and silly shenanigans. Obama-care is funded by tax dollars. Democrats now must defend a tax increase to justify the Obama-care law.
Finally, he struck down as unconstitutional, the Obama-care idea that the federal government can bully states into complying by yanking their existing medicaid funding. Liberals, through Obama-care, basically said to the states — ‘comply with Obama-care or we will stop existing funding.’ Roberts ruled that is a no-no. If a state takes the money, fine, the Feds can tell the state how to run a program, but if the state refuses money, the federal government can’t penalize the state by yanking other funding. Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12, 25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national, is it?
Ultimately, Roberts supported states rights by limiting the federal government’s coercive abilities. He ruled that the government can not force the people to purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases.
Although he didn’t guarantee Romney a win, he certainly did more than his part and should be applauded.
And he did this without creating a civil war or having bricks thrown through his windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.
Brilliant.
I agree that Constitutionally this was brilliant and I certainly believe that it was intentional. It took a brave man to do what Roberts did, to expose himself to the attacks from the right, but when it comes down to it, in the real battle, what one Supreme Court does, another can undo. We aren't in any better actual position than we were the day before. The Constitution means nothing where all of the actual words have been consistently re-defined to mean the opposite.
ReplyDeleteBully for Roberts and from a legal scholar point of view it was masterful, but in the real world it doesn't mean anything to a tyrannical government that doesn't give a rat's ass what is or is not Constitutional.
Has anyone actually read whats in Obamacare? Your giving credit where none is due. This is less of a slap in the face for Obama and more of a love tap.
ReplyDeleteOk, so the government cannot tell us what to buy. They sure as shit are going to penalize us for not buying this. So I don't see much of a difference there.
Whether its called a penalty or tax, we know what it is, the government knows what it is, and the people will most likely conform because its the "law", they've been conditioned to do so. This was not a small win for the constitution nor us, it was not any kind of win.
The Insurance companies will make billions off of this. Its estimated approximately 34 million people will now have coverage. Thats 34 million new paying customers. Our government is no different. Its also estimated that 25 million will take the tax hit instead of paying for coverage. Thats 25 million people paying additional taxes.
Its easy to connect the dots, just follow the money. Insurance companies are owned by banks. Their going to make a huge fortune from this. Taxes go to a government that borrows trillions from these same banks, and they'll make another huge fortune from that.
In addition to that. Obama care will aid and abet in turning us into surfs as people become more reliant on having the government tell them what to do.
I would be more concerned about who was whispering in Roberts ear than believing he did something for the good of the nation. Because he didn't help us or the constitution. The only winners here are the bankers who want to own everyone and everything, and our tyrannical government that wants to control everyone and everything.
RedWulf
What you said is what I thought back in 2009 when this monstrosity was voted. The Insurance companies would benefit, and that being forced to cover all pre-existing conditions would be far outweighed by the captive market they were gaining. Because the "market will do fine" and because the Dutch have had a similar healthcare system since 1996 (it was the inspiration for Romney/Obamacare) is why I am pessimistic that the Republicans will repeal it.
DeleteIronically, it is the insurance middle-man that motivates the average street-level progressive's argument for single payer healthcare. Social Democracy/Democratic Socialism/Fabian Socialism is just a "kinder and gentler" Fascism. Fascism is the one form of collectivist rule that does not run out of other people's money.
Right now, all we can hope is that ramming speed (see my comment above) damages the progressives worse than the rest of us. I will say again, that Obama and the democrats are on record as saying that the individual mandate is not a tax.
"Its easy to connect the dots, just follow the money..."
ReplyDeleteWell done RedWulf; you got it exactly right IMO. Of course it would be the same with Romney, in spades.
And not only that, "follow the money" works for every statist invention since ancient Greece, maybe longer. That's all it's ever about. That's why we can talk all the liberty ideas we want, as long as we hand over the cash.
Someone's gotta eat all that shrimp and lobster. Surely it ought to be the anointed, working almost half the year making huge money and making everyone else's lives--at least those who just want to work and live--worse.
We're so far past tipping points and crossed so many lines that it ain't even funny. Me, I don't think I can bring myself to wear an empty holster.
Here is a contrary take on the SCOTUS ruling that is very well argued and sounds much more logical to me. It indicates this definitely was NOT a win for anyone except the Left and Obamacare. If true, it does not set any precedent at all concerning the Commerce Clause.
ReplyDeletehttp://coldfury.com/2012/06/30/desperation-2/