John Roberts: The Umpire Strikes Out
Jun 25, 2015 Commentary, Political, SCOTUScare
There is no doubt Chief Justice John Roberts is an intelligent man. He can cite and discuss legal cases without notes and he is well versed. These fact make his two decisions in the Affordable Care Act (previously known as Obamacare but now to be known as SCOTUScare) quite perplexing. Roberts basically rewrote the law and twisted logic as well as stepping out of his area of responsibility to ensure that the law formerly known as Obamacare survived.
When the ACA was being forced on us the Obama Regime said that the fee for not getting insurance was a penalty and NOT a tax. Obama chided George Stephanopoulos when George said the penalty seemed to fit the dictionary definition of a tax. Of course Obama was lying then because he knew it was actually a tax.
But the Regime called it a penalty and defended it as such to the public. The Democrats called it a penalty in the law and told their constituents that it was not a tax. Mr. Gruber, the POS who helped with this said it had to be called a penalty or it would have never passed and that the Regime depended on the stupidity of the public to get it passed.
When the Regime went to court it argued that the penalty was really a tax for the purpose of arguing in court and that anything to the contrary was just silly.
Despite overwhelming evidence John Roberts sided with the left wing of the court and rewrote the legislation to make the penalty a tax and within the authority of Congress. He upheld the law by legislating from the bench.
Fast forward to now. There is a portion of the ACA that says subsidies will only be available to those who get insurance from exchanges established by the state. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that this sentence means the individual states. This is how it was intended and the Democrats along with Goebbels Gruber even told us that it would be in the best interest of the people if states set up exchanges so that the people could get subsidies. Given the straight forward language and what they said there is no doubt what it was supposed to be. This sentence was the subject of a Supreme Court case and once again Roberts sided with the liberal wing and rewrote the legislation. Roberts read the minds of those in Congress (Democrats only) and concluded that they really meant that state and federal government.
Roberts disgraced himself and his court and his legacy will be one of failure. I do not like the left wing right wing idea of a court. Courts are supposed to be impartial and rule on the law. Roberts made himself a legislator along with the lefties and rewrote the law to once again save Obama.
After Roberts knelt before Obama and pleased him there is no doubt now how he will vote on gay marriage. This issue should be left to the states and Roberts made a big deal of states rights when he was nominated but he will vote with the rainbow crowd and swallow hard for Obama.
It seems to me that Roberts must have been neglected as a child. His parents probably did not love him and daddy was probably never around. Roberts appears to need the approval of others and he seems to go out of his way to get the approval of Obama, his closet lover.
John Roberts once believed, or at least he said he did, that the judiciary was there to interpret not to make up the laws. Roberts basically stated that it is not his job to play the game or make the rules but to make sure those playing the game are following he rules. He did that when he compared judges to baseball umpires: “[I]t’s my job to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch or bat.”
Roberts has gone from being just the umpire to also being on the rules committee. Instead of just making sure others follow the rules he is now changing them to suit his master’s needs. Indeed, the umpire has struck out.
Justice Scalia put it most succinctly when he stated in his dissent (it is well worth your time to read the dissent. Scalia basically spells out how it should work in a legal and logical way and he holds little back with regard to how he views his colleagues in the majority):
Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved. Court Ruling
Scalia is correct. This court has a mandate and it is to protect and save the law now known as SCOTUScare. Obama put Kagan and Sotomayor on the court because they are not jurists they are activists. They do not care what the Constitution says or what is lawful or right as long as their liberal views and desires are taken care of. They are there to ensure the liberal agenda (I should call it the Communist agenda since Jarrett and Obama were raised by Commies and are commies themselves) is upheld the law and the Constitution be damned. Add those two to Buzzy Ginsburg, Breyer and wishy-washy Kennedy and you have the make up of a court that ignores the rule of law. When Roberts joins the mix it equals the downfall of society and the furtherance of communism.
God help them all when the day comes for them to be held accountable. It will be quite unpleasant indeed.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: communism, dissent, lies, pussy, roberts, scalia, scotuscare
A Tale Of Two Media
Aug 12, 2009 Political
[note]It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair… Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities[/note]
The discourse in America is being attacked by the liberal media because the people are attacking the plans of their chosen messiah. Obama has been spending like crazy, breaking campaign promises right and left and he has been pushing a Socialist agenda on the people. He and his Democratic minions as well as his Chicago thugs and SEIU goons are trying to stifle dissent by attacking the people who are expressing themselves. But what are we coming to? The signs that are displayed and the actions of the people are out of this world:
…protesters stalked his motorcade, assailed his limousine and stoned a car containing his advisers. Calling the President a terrorist, the demonstrators bullied passers-by, including gay softball players and a wheelchair-bound grandfather with multiple sclerosis.
One protester even brandished a sign that seemed to advocate the President’s assassination. The man held a large photo of the President that had been doctored to show a gun barrel pressed against his temple.
What kind of people would do this sort of thing? These are over the top antics by truly deranged people and the media are right to go after them because this is no way to express dissatisfaction. The media should not, however, say that these fringe elements represent an entire group of people.
Not to worry, the media did not even cover the event very much and none of the people were labeled as terrorists, whack jobs, nuts, or racists. This is because the paraphrased quote above is from a story describing how liberals reacted to President Bush when he attended a fundraiser in 2002.
The media did not cover this, the talking heads did not have any of them on TV discussing how dangerous they are and asking what kind of impression people should have and they were seen as people being patriotic by dissenting.
Now that Obama and his Democrats are catching hell the media are portraying people as nuts. Those who do have a Nazi symbol are pointed out by Nancy Pelosi (she did not point out the Nazi symbol at the Bush protest) and the media as representatives of an entire group of people and the group is stated to be all conservative. Democrats do not need Republican votes to pass anything so there must be more than just Republicans at these meetings.
This is how the media reacts to different parties. When Republicans are in power the protests are seen as dissent and the over the top stuff is ignored because the evil Republican deserves it. When a Democrat is in charge the media rally and start labeling people exercising their First Amendment rights as right wing nut jobs who are a bunch of racists that can’t stand a black man being in charge. This is what the media ignores while labeling you a nut job or dangerous:
Protesters slashed the tires of several state patrol cruisers and leapt onto an occupied police car, slamming the hood and blocking the windshield with placards. A female police officer was knocked to the street by advancing protesters, badly injuring her wrist.
The angry protest grew so violent that the Secret Service was forced to take the highly unusual step of using a backup route for Bush’s motorcade because the primary route had been compromised by protesters, one of whom pounded his fist on the president’s moving limousine.
Obama wants to stifle dissent and debate as evidenced by his statement that he wants those who caused the problem to be quiet and let him clean up the mess. There are plenty of people from both parties who are responsible for this mess so if he wants those who caused it to be quiet DC will sound like a library.
Pelosi and Hoyer called those who were up in arms un-American and Arlen Specter said that they do not represent most of America. As if a guy who can’t figure out what party he wants to be in knows what represents America.
Don’t let these elitists get you down. We have a formidable task in fighting the Socialists because we have to fight the elected as well as their media wing. The media will not report on their own mess but will hype up anything that will bring scorn to bear on the conservatives in this country.
Turn their programs off. Fight against government abuse. Vote every member of the House out of office next year. If you only vote for Democrats then vote for the primary challenger, same goes for Republicans. If there are no challengers in the primary then don’t vote for that particular candidate. If party is a secondary concern then vote for the other person. We can change the political landscape by voting them out of office.
We can also change what they do by voicing our opposition to their Socialist plans.
Now is the time for the next revolution. It needs to be peaceful (as long as the opposition keeps it that way) but effective.
Source:
Fox News
Related:
Excellent article by Dorothy Rabinowitz
UPDATE: Georgia Democrat David Scott’s office sign had a swastika painted on it. I don’t condone that kind of behavior (but rest assured the liberal media will blame it on a conservative extremist) but found what Scott said kind of interesting:
“We have got to make sure that the symbol of the swastika does not win, that the racial hatred that’s bubbling up does not win this debate,” Scott said in a telephone interview. “There’s so much hatred out there for President (Barack) Obama.” Yahoo News
I don’t remember Scott having this sentiment when the radical left was marching against Bush and proudly displaying that Nazi symbol.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: dissent, health care, liberals, nazi, Obama, radicals, swastika, toen hall
Obama On Wrong Side Of History
Jan 30, 2009 Political
When Barack Obama was running for the presidency he made a lot of promises. This is nothing new as all politicians try to be everything to everyone and they all make tons of promises. Most people know that they cannot keep the promises and, more importantly, the voters know it.
That is, of course, except for Obama supporters. Peggy the Moocher actually believes that Obama will buy her gas and pay for her house and countless others, including the doting media, believe that Obama will change the world.
Barack Obama has tried to lower expectations since he was elected and even stated, in an interview, that it was campaign rhetoric. In other words, you didn’t actually believe that, did y’all?
During Obama’s less than stellar inauguration speech he said:
“To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history ….” [emphasis mine]
The sainted one is trying to get this economic stimulus boondoggle passed and he has been courting Republicans, not because he needs them to get it passed but because he needs them to share the blame if it fails to stimulate the economy (and it will be a failure). But along the way this disciple of Saul Alinsky used rule #13 in Rules for Radicals in an attempt to silence dissent (this is listed as rule 12 in some references).
[note]Rule 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)[/note]
Barack Obama picked a fight with Rush Limbaugh by saying that Republicans could not listen to Limbaugh and get anything done. Why would the president of the United States single out a private citizen for scorn? Why would the president go after anyone unless he felt that person was a threat? Interestingly, Limbaugh came out with his own economic plan in the spirit of bipartisanship and this seems to have stifled the sainted one.
Rush Limbaugh is a voice of dissent. Dissent use to be a good thing when it was Democrats dissenting. They told us constantly that dissent was a patriotic thing and their messiah even reiterated that point. The days of clinging to power by silencing dissent are over.
But then, as he has done since he swore in, Obama did the opposite of what he said. He said no lobbyists and he made an exception. He said no silencing of dissent and he wants to silence Limbaugh and any other voice that does not sing in harmony with his tune. Stop listening to Limbaugh or we can’t get anything done is the same thing as saying that the dissenting voice is getting in the way so we need to quiet it.
I know Obama’s ascent to the top was historic on a number of levels but it would seem that in practice Obama is on the wrong side of history.
And that is according to his own words.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]