Posted on 06/30/2012 9:36:35 AM PDT by Bobalu
It is time, the Chief Justice said, for the will of the people to be expressed through the political departments. You should not try to make the Supreme Court the final arbitrator of such political matters. It has not the wisdom for that.
This election will now be held largely on the issue of Obama Care. If the President wins this will be seen as a vindication of that act and of the philosophy behind it. If the President fails of election the Act will be repealed, and there is an opportunity for the United States to turn back and forsake its former ways.
Now it is up to us. Mr. Roberts has said he cannot protect you from the consequences of your actions, and he has done so at a time and in a way that makes the question stark and clear. Whatever his intentions, this is what he has done, and I for one thank him for it.
(Excerpt) Read more at jerrypournelle.com ...
No reason to get complacent. We have to act and act decisively. If we won’t, neither will Congress. Congress must learn it’s either repeal or revolution. There are no grey areas anymore. We want our country back.
But roberts had the guts to do it with a backhand slap at Obama and Congress.
Swatting 0bama/Roberts Care down would have had the same effect.
Sounds like you should vote for Ubama, since you demand certainty.
Believe me, I am anything but complacent.
I still despise Rodney, and will not be giving him a cent.
And his sleazy "repeal and replace" slogan makes my leg tingle for the opportunity to kick him in the gonads, but he's the only play left at this moment in time.
The only "replacement" necessary is tort reform, and privatization.
If he gives us Rodneycare/Obamacare Lite, he is a one-term wonder.
Did you read the part of Roberts’ opinion that called for smaller government?
Would being partison and voting against Obamacare accomplished that? I don’t think so.
Roberts also let state opt out.
Tied it to the commerce clause
Tied it to the dims and a tax.
That wouldn’t have happened if they had just voted against it.
Read the thread that compares Madison and Roberts.
There are also references in some articles to the Marshall Court and the Roberts Court. They both forced liberal presidents to toe the conservative line.......stay tuned.
Being partisan and supporting 0bama and the ‘rats didn’t put the issue back in 0bama’s lap. Swatting it down would have put it back on Zer0’s agenda. As it is now, The W0n can move on.
But that’s not enough. Sorry. I’m only responding to what you laid out.
We have to be proactive. We have to work in and out of Congress. I understand Judicial Watch may be initiating a lawsuit against the SC for their decision. Fine. Will it be effective? Who knows. But, fine. Someone here, or on some other thread, posted the timeline for judicial responses to SC rulings. That’s something that needs to be looked into quickly. I understood there is a 25 day filing deadline with fees involved.
We can’t let up on Congress. We have to teach them it’s repeal or the highway. And even should Romney get elected, repealing is one thing, what replaces it is another. And some form of Romney care will not do. It’s back to where we were, get the nation’s economy back on the right track, then take another look at healthcare down the line - with the focus being on improving what’s already there; not an overhaul.
Again, we have to be proactive. I’m pinging hoosiermama on this because she and I have had conversations about what to do...
“This election will now be held largely on the issue of Obama Care. If the President wins this will be seen as a vindication of that act and of the philosophy behind it. If the President fails of election the Act will be repealed,”
Either way our Constitutional republic and with it our liberty is lost to the shifting despotism of democracy.
The very propose of the Constitution was to insure that Government remained limited in what it could do so that politicians either acting on behalf of the mob or their own vocation could not simply do whatever they wanted to us.
The founders knew thou-out history that this could only lead to the worse kind of despotism.
“Did you read the part of Roberts’ opinion that called for smaller government?”
Anther moment of backstabbing hypocracicy eh?
There is nothing whatsoever “partison” about upholding the limits of the Federal Constitution. Even Kennedy did it. To call such a thing partisan is a sick dilution of partisan politics. LEFTIST partisan politics!
“Roberts also let state opt out.”
O thank you very much dictator John Roberts for drawing yet anther artificial line in the Text. Might I remind the dishonorable John that the Federal Constitution no more mentions the power of Washington to give our States money for Medicare than Obamacare? If he is to decide it is unconstitutional for Washington to alter its unconstitutional scheme perhaps he could do what the Original authors of that scheme failed to do and find its authorization in the Federal Constitution?
Before rendering the clause pointless.
The democrats and their voters could care even less about the “logic” of John than I do. The democrats like me care about the ends accomplished here not John’s means. Those ends are a boundless(constitutionless) Federal Government subject only to the shifting despotism of democracy.
Besides I thought Traitor John was being “non-partisan” *rolls eyes* at the hypocritical tyrant in Washington.
That wouldn’t have been necessary to even mention. As it is Robert’s dicta will not do one thing to enhance our position as the liberal injustice have never and will never respect any precedent unless they find it advantageous to advancing their ideology. Courting them serves no propose, and as Traitor John just demonstrated replacing them on the bench is equally useless.
It is the opinion of this traitor to our Constitutional law that we are condemned to the shifting despotic passions of democracy, and thus no longer a Constitutional(limited) republic of any meaningful form.
I’m sorry but as illustrated by the chief injustice there is no longer any reason to hope for our liberty under this “federal government”.
We can never hope to keep the mob’s shifting passions from trampling upon our liberty, without the protection of a Constitution. As much as you might like to the idea, winning every election is nether possible nor desirable. If it were we would have no elections and we would need no Constitutional republic.
Nor can we (as Traitor John demonstrated by HIS individual act) simply replace the ones that would permit such unbound(unconstitutional) power. The experience with John himself among many others exposes the fact that too many of them would rather stab us in the bag than give us the liberty Our constitution demands. We can win enough elections to appoint the majority of the Federal “injustices”(as we have) and still never have a real written Constitution of civil government under them, due to the high propensity of their corrupted treachery(like John Roberts).
Our one remaining hope for liberty involves the destruction of this “Federal Government” and rebuilding in its place or somewhere else(if secession be necessary) the foundation of liberty(a real Constitution).
“They both forced liberal presidents to toe the conservative line.......stay tuned.”
If Thomas Jefferson was a liberal than so am I, and Obama is not.
In addition to now being able to attend all those liberal cocktail parties, Benedict Roberts has earned back an invitation to Obama’s state of the union message in February unless, of course, if Obama is evicted in November
fyi
Congress’ approval ratings are even lower than Obama’s - -
because they won’t do the work they were hired to do in 2010!
Now that's funny. Obamacare is going to become just like Roe v. Wade the Republican Party will say they're for overturning/repealing/restricting it but will do nothing when they have the opportunity. Don't you remember when the Republicans had both the Executive and Legislative? How many times was illegalizing abortion brought up??
I'm not going to vote for a socialist of either party.
If Romney get in and fails are you going to come to the realization electing Republicans like Romney and the Bushes is counterproductive to the conservative cause?
So, if you know how to snap your fingers and make things different, why don't you do it?
Otherwise it appears to me that you just like to play with your wee wee and pretend you're doing something.
Jerry Pournelle is my favorite Science Fiction Writer. I don’t agree with him, but I respect his opinion. He thinks better of the electorate than they deserve. They will vote for “free stuff” until the country is destroyed.
The only thing standing between America and a Dictatorship is The Roberts Court. We have 3 branches of government. Obama has neutered Congress, and has been attacking the court since his first State of the Union. His intent is clear. Destroying 2 of the 3 branches leaves only the Executive.
The court maintains authority only so long as the country perceives it as legitimate. Roberts ruling gives the power to keep or strike Obamacare to the people while maintaining the integrity of the court, strengthening the 10th Amendment, limiting Federal Power, removing the teeth of the law, and, by accurately identifying it as a tax, providing clear procedures for repeal. Brilliant.
If America doesn’t want Obamacare we must get rid of Obama. What the Chief Justice gave us was the ability to use free will. There’s nothing more Constitutional than that.
We make things different by voting for conservatives and conservatives only, preventing liberal Republicans from destroying conservatism from within the party.
It isn't that hard to figure out. Sadly, despite two failed Bush Presidencies, you haven't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.