Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Patton: Will John Roberts Betray Us Again?
http://www.gopusa.com ^ | March 28, 2013 | Doug Patton

Posted on 03/28/2013 8:24:30 AM PDT by NKP_Vet

In the tortured justification for his vote to sustain Obamacare last summer, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts pointed to Congress's authority to levy taxes — an argument not even put forward by its advocates. (They, in fact, had argued that it was not a tax.) As a direct result of Roberts's folly, the stark reality of Barack Obama's "fundamental transformation of America" creeps closer each day.

(Excerpt) Read more at gopusa.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: sourcetitlenoturl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last
Short answer. YES. Reason? He's a liberal, and probably a sodomite.
1 posted on 03/28/2013 8:24:30 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Is there a mustach in Mexico? [I stole that one from Barry Weiss].


2 posted on 03/28/2013 8:27:09 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

More worried about Kennedy on this one.


3 posted on 03/28/2013 8:27:18 AM PDT by Trapped Behind Enemy Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Somebody on the left has “the goods” on him,
and he’s not man enough to step up in front of the cameras
and tell the nation about it and refuse to resign.


4 posted on 03/28/2013 8:27:19 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

I dont see it in these two cases as they are about over-turning laws. He refused to overturn O care and will refuse to overturn DOMA and the CA referendum is my guess.


5 posted on 03/28/2013 8:27:21 AM PDT by sickoflibs (To GOP : Any path to US citizenship IS putting them ahead in line. Stop lying about your position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Obama will probably being leaning hard on the court again. The thing I read last time was that Roberts was about to be smeared about adopting two kids. I hope Roberts has something up his sleeve to counteract the Obama thugocracy.
6 posted on 03/28/2013 8:28:25 AM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Yes.


7 posted on 03/28/2013 8:29:49 AM PDT by Artcore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Yes... he will.


8 posted on 03/28/2013 8:30:24 AM PDT by ScottinVA (Gun control: Steady firm grip, target within sights, squeeze the trigger slowly...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Please . Pray . HARD !


9 posted on 03/28/2013 8:31:14 AM PDT by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Roberts amd/or Kennedy will sell out.

Alito, Scalia and Thomas will do the right thing. Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayor and Breyer are guaranteed to do the opposite. It will come down to Roberts and Kennedy.

In order for saniity to prevail both must reject gay marriage. That won't happen.

10 posted on 03/28/2013 8:33:15 AM PDT by marshmallow (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

http://www.johnspeedie.com/healy/Uh_Yeah.mp3


11 posted on 03/28/2013 8:34:03 AM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

the troubling part is that both all the justices and all the lawyers refered to homosexuals as a status not a behavior.

We are discussing a BEHAVIOR not a status. We outlaw all sorts of behavior. We have federal pot laws, we have (since 1913) federal immigration laws, we have sex slave laws.

The justices have bought the “gay gene” myth. Also it is apparent from roberts comment on politicians falling all over themselves to “go pro-homosexual” the justices are watching primarily msnbc and cnn and only readig the NYT.

The conservative opinion is not represented anywhere.


12 posted on 03/28/2013 8:35:40 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

AND THIS IS WHY “CONSERVATISM” MUST, MUST, MUST, MUST BE MORE THAN SIMPLY ECONOMIC LIBERTARIANISM.


13 posted on 03/28/2013 8:35:43 AM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Why is it that only conservative justices turn liberal once they get on SCOTUS and not the otherway around?


14 posted on 03/28/2013 8:37:05 AM PDT by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789

Actually, the libertarian position...proper libertarian position....woud be to protect the rights of those who are already under the contract of marriage...and to uphold what THAT contract means.

And BTW, there is no such thing as SIMPLY ECONOMIC liberty. If you don’t own your property, you don’t own yourself. It’s called the “sanctity of life OUTSIDE the womb.”


15 posted on 03/28/2013 8:39:48 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

John Roberts’ vote on Obamacare paired with Kagen’s appointment and approval to the bench has, to me, made the court meaningless.

Frankly, I don’t give a damn what they say.


16 posted on 03/28/2013 8:40:32 AM PDT by jakota (jakota)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AU72

Because they live and eat and play and drink cocktails and join health clubs and got to PTAs and grocery stores IN WASHINGTON where you can’t “fit in” unless you are liberal.


17 posted on 03/28/2013 8:40:37 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

This will go like everything else. The on-going news will be good. “They asked great questions, gave the lawyers hell.” Then voted for it anyway.


18 posted on 03/28/2013 8:42:09 AM PDT by TangoLimaSierra (To the left the truth looks like Right-Wing extremism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Do Bears crap in the woods?


19 posted on 03/28/2013 8:43:02 AM PDT by gitmogrunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AU72
Why is it that only conservative justices turn liberal once they get on SCOTUS and not the otherway around?

Cause and effect. Conservatives do not use thuggery, blackmail, mudslinging or threats to get things done.

All those are de riguer for the Left

20 posted on 03/28/2013 8:43:31 AM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (The Constitution does not guarantee public safety, it guarantees liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

Zero and his demons would deport Robert’s kids and let all zero’s illegal family stay?


21 posted on 03/28/2013 8:45:15 AM PDT by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

I was just posting that idea on another thread when you pinged me so I included you.

But legally many states define it as a status as the SCOTUS is very likely to do with Kennedy,


22 posted on 03/28/2013 8:45:25 AM PDT by sickoflibs (To GOP : Any path to US citizenship IS putting them ahead in line. Stop lying about your position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Will Roberts betray us again?

Would a cow lick Lot's wife?

23 posted on 03/28/2013 8:47:33 AM PDT by N. Theknow (Kennedys=Can't drive, can't ski, can't fly, can't skipper a boat, but they know what's best for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Darn, I thought this would be a GENERAL Geo. Patton parody, ala the Hitler parodies, of Patton dressing down Roberts.

The answer to the question...

Yes, Roberts seems to be a key part in 0's Fundamental Transformation™ of America :(

24 posted on 03/28/2013 8:48:01 AM PDT by Jane Long (Background checks? Dandy idea, Mr. President. Shoulda started with yours. - Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Looks like the USSC will punt based on the standing issue and find a reason to let the 9th circus ruling stand. That gives the homos almost everything they want.

The only sure thing is it will be some tortured BS ruling like the kenyancare decision.


25 posted on 03/28/2013 8:53:47 AM PDT by lodi90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: txhurl

Yes, obviously.

That’s symptomatic of the left - they punish the righteous and reward the wicked.


26 posted on 03/28/2013 8:54:27 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Yes, Justice Roberts in comprimised. In his vetting process, he claimed his children were adopted from somewhere in Latin America. In deed these two toe-heads were adopted from Ireland. It is illegal for non Irish nationals to adopt there. Sticky issue.


27 posted on 03/28/2013 9:01:13 AM PDT by Tugo (Stand firm in the Faith.. HE LIVES!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AU72

“Why is it that only conservative justices turn liberal once they get on SCOTUS and not the otherway around?”

Because they want to be accepted by their pals on the cocktail party circut. The pols and media elite are constantly hanging out with each other and everyone wants to fit in and keep getting the invites.


28 posted on 03/28/2013 9:01:49 AM PDT by CSM (Keeper of the Dave Ramsey Ping list. FReepmail me if you want your beeber stuned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Considering his convoluted reasoning behind deciding for Obamacare, I would suspect that some very influential outside pressure was put on him.

Once a sell out ...

==


29 posted on 03/28/2013 9:04:58 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Somebody on the left has “the goods” on him

You're right. He should do what Petraeus did when he was blackmailed. Not resign though.

30 posted on 03/28/2013 9:07:31 AM PDT by ladyjane (For the first time in my life I am not proud of my country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

He is wholly owned by the White Hut. Ain’t blackmail a wild and crazy thang?


31 posted on 03/28/2013 9:08:40 AM PDT by Wordkraft (Remember who the Collaborators are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

He has a very good reason for not resigning, and he can state that as well -

0bama will appoint an uber-leftist radical in his place.


32 posted on 03/28/2013 9:08:56 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

I think the term is Souterize. Something that is chronic in the Bush family.


33 posted on 03/28/2013 9:18:15 AM PDT by GeorgeTex (Obama-Four M President (Mendacious Manchurian Muslim Marxist))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Will John Roberts Betray Us Again?

Does it snow in Vermont?
Can green chile stew be found in New Mexico?

34 posted on 03/28/2013 9:40:43 AM PDT by Fiji Hill (Io Triumphe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trapped Behind Enemy Lines
>> More worried about Kennedy on this one. <<

I'm equally worried both of them will cave. I hope they prove me wrong.

35 posted on 03/28/2013 9:43:21 AM PDT by BillyBoy ( Impeach Obama? Yes We Can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
Congress could always re-assert its authority to pass laws such as DOMA with as broad a support as it achieved and pass a law that restricts the court's right to rule on matters pertaining to marriage.

The Ninth Circuit could rule any way it wanted but since it's purview in such matters is clipped by Congress in this example, CA's Prop 8 can survive as it was voted buy the people. Period.

Would render the Court's opinion effectively moot and inoperative.

Now, the Executive could always choose not to enforce the law and the Congress could always then choose to impeach Holder and add that to his contempt of Congress charge from F&F -- as well as his boss Obama.

The Court doesn't have to be the last word on anything if we don't let it.

This is what CAN be done, not necessarily a prediction of what WILL be done.

FReegards!


36 posted on 03/28/2013 9:45:46 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: AU72
Why is it that only conservative justices turn liberal once they get on SCOTUS and not the otherway around?

Because they were never conservative to begin with. They only played a conservative on TV during their appointment publicity blitz.

37 posted on 03/28/2013 9:54:21 AM PDT by Count of Monte Fisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CSM; Impy; fieldmarshaldj; sickoflibs
>> “Why is it that only conservative justices turn liberal once they get on SCOTUS and not the otherway around?” Because they want to be accepted by their pals on the cocktail party circut. The pols and media elite are constantly hanging out with each other and everyone wants to fit in and keep getting the invites. <<

That's one of the biggest problems with the federal courts, IMO. Some conservatives claims that Dem presidents NEVER "accidentally" appoint a conservative judge. That's not true. It hasn't happened much in recent years, but occasionally they do end up with a stealth conservative (in fact, I think most of the most outspoken anti-New Deal SCOTUS judges was a Woodrow Wilson appointee)

However, I have seen ZERO examples of a federal judge that "started off" reliably liberal and slowly drifted right over the years. It's happened to a handful of elected politicians (mostly in the south, I'm pretty sure I know the reasons why they moved rightward) but not for federal judges. Unfortunately there are MANY examples of judges who "started off" pretty conservative and became insane Marxists by the end of their tenure.

IMO, this is one of the biggest reasons why judges should not get a lifetime appointment to the bench. I think these guys get drunk with power and bask over the mainstream media applauding them for correcting "injustices" in America by enacting new unconstitutional "rights" out of thin air. At the very least, the judges should get terms like anyone else and their tenure would have be renewed every 10 years (even if we didn't go the elected route, it would at least require the Senate to reappoint them and judges that went rogue like Earl Warren would be subjected to scrutiny.)

38 posted on 03/28/2013 9:55:14 AM PDT by BillyBoy ( Impeach Obama? Yes We Can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Wordkraft

He is wholly owned by the White Hut. Ain’t blackmail a wild and crazy thang?
**************************************************************
If Roberts’ “handlers” get word that Kennedy is going to provide the progressives with their needed 5th vote (and thus Roberts’ vote is not needed), then they give Roberts a little slack and let him vote in a manner that will help him maintain a conservative facade (or vote his true beliefs if he actually is, in his heart, a constitutionalist/originalist).

In any case, this whole thing is incredibly disgusting.


39 posted on 03/28/2013 9:56:38 AM PDT by House Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

The Supreme Court - About to Play God Again?


40 posted on 03/28/2013 10:08:31 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

He doesn’t need to resign.


41 posted on 03/28/2013 10:10:23 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MrB

This explains how he sailed through confirmation without the RATS putting up a fight. Look how they fought Bush on Alito. Big difference.


42 posted on 03/28/2013 10:50:42 AM PDT by lone star annie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
"Actually, the libertarian position...proper libertarian position....woud be to protect the rights of those who are already under the contract of marriage...and to uphold what THAT contract means.

"And BTW, there is no such thing as SIMPLY ECONOMIC liberty. If you don’t own your property, you don’t own yourself. It’s called the “sanctity of life OUTSIDE the womb.”

I agree with you, but I am referring to the fact that many on FR are so focused on economics, and seem to not believe that the issues of morality in our nation have any real bearing on our survivability as a nation.

43 posted on 03/28/2013 11:22:25 AM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789
I agree with you, but I am referring to the fact that many on FR are so focused on economics, and seem to not believe that the issues of morality in our nation have any real bearing on our survivability as a nation.

In the spirit of friendly debate, allow me a slight quibble with your take. I think that there are many of us who think government's role has more to do with protecting liberty - and while morality is key for survivability, there are limits to what can be legislated by government. I also get very offended when pastors and others who are paid by tax exempt religious organizations criticize "fiscal" conservatives - which is very hypocritical of them to do. They often accuse folks like myself...who are total conservatives...of being "fiscal only" when we simly decide that liberty is the key issue.

Now I totally agree with the fiscal component of morality....but do you agree that there is a moral component to fiscal issues...ie....that property is a sacred right?

44 posted on 03/28/2013 11:36:18 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Short answer. YES.

Based on his zerOcare decision, he should let Prop 8 stand as a decision made by the people. And, DoMA as a decision of the representatives of the people. If, only, he could find a tax in there.

45 posted on 03/28/2013 11:44:26 AM PDT by depressed in 06 (America conceived in liberty, dies in slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy
IMO, this is one of the biggest reasons why judges should not get a lifetime appointment to the bench. I think these guys get drunk with power and bask over the mainstream media applauding them for correcting "injustices" in America by enacting new unconstitutional "rights" out of thin air.

I think you are correct. This is the reason for Roberts' betrayal. He wants to be spoken of in reverential terms the same way libs speak of Earl Warren. I don't think anybody "has something" on him. He is captive to his own ego and vanity.

46 posted on 03/28/2013 1:57:36 PM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy; fieldmarshaldj; AuH2ORepublican

That cocktail party thing is a big problem. Damn peer pressure. It’s like friggin kids stuff!!

I’m not sure that was the problem with Roberts though. I think he is too clever for his own good and full of himself.


47 posted on 03/28/2013 3:17:34 PM PDT by Impy (All in favor of Harry Reid meeting Mr. Mayhem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Impy; Sans-Culotte; fieldmarshaldj; AuH2ORepublican
If he's rock solid in the conservative camp on the DOMA & Prop 8 rulings, as well as all other major future decisions, then Obamacare was a aberration from his normal conservative idealogy and there might have been foul play behind-the-scenes like Roberts being coersed or whatever.

If he sells out on gay marriage and doesn't uphold DOMA and Prop. 8 (which sadly, my "gut" feeling tell me he will), then Roberts has gone squishy on us and I doubt he's being blackmailed. More likely we just ended up with another Sandra Day O'Connor (not as bad as "another Souter", but certainly terrible in the short run given that Obama is president and we only have 3 solid conservatives on SCOTUS right now to stop this stuff)

I doubt we'll ever get my dream of a fully elected SCOTUS, but I'm sure the vast majority of Americans would agree on ending lifetime appointments for SCOTUS judges and Congress should move to make such reforms in the judiciary. I don't want Clinton and Obama's appointees serving for the next several decades, either.

I also wish the judges represented geographic/population areas instead of the nation as a whole. There's a good case to be made that that was the founders intent and we've lost that since they did away with the justices "riding the circuit" in the early 1800s. Now most of the SCOTUS judges are from New York and California. We could remove three of the commie RAT judges immediately if we required them to be from different areas of the country:


48 posted on 03/28/2013 4:42:01 PM PDT by BillyBoy ( Impeach Obama? Yes We Can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

To the point, if Roberts goes to the dark side on this, he will be the reincarnation of Earl Warren. The nation will not be safe from their ultraleftist mechanations.


49 posted on 03/28/2013 5:04:04 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Roberts is a broken man.

-PJ

50 posted on 03/28/2013 5:08:40 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson