Wednesday, July 04, 2012

John Roberts

What we've learned in the past few days since the SCOTUS decision finding required universal health care constitutional:

1) Chief Justice John Roberts had first decided required universal health care was not constitutional.  He had written what was to be the majority opinion with Kennedy, Thomas, Scalia and Alito.

2) Then, Chief Justice John Roberts changed his mind.  The majority opinion became the dissenting opinion, and Chief Justice John Roberts wrote his own justification for the constitutionality of required universal health care.  In other words, John Roberts decided it is constitutional to require a citizen to buy the required universal health care, or to pay for it via tax/fine/penalty if he chooses not to.

3) We've heard the opinions of those we respect.  One said Chief Justice John Robert's opinion was "incompetent".  Others have called for his resignation.  These are new criticisms of Supreme Court Justices from the right.

We wanted to share Tam's comments from her post, If he's hit you once, he'll hit you again:

I've been stewing over Roberts' snide little line, "It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices," over the weekend, getting madder every time I think about it.

All those laws you guys have struck down as unconstitutional over the last couple centuries, whose "political choices" were you protecting us from those times? Had those other laws been imposed on us by insidious outsiders or something, so you could protect us from their consequences, but we gotta bend over and take this one because it turns out Nancy Pelosi is not actually from Betelgeuse?

The reaction of the GOP loyalists has been amusing, too. They've spent the last several days staggering around the internet, sporting a shiner and telling us they ran into a doorknob and that John Roberts really does love them and he always buys them flowers to make up afterwards. It's just pathetic.

Keep telling me how it's important for me to vote for Romney because of the potential SCOTUS nominations coming up, and we wouldn't want Obama to get to appoint a liberal like that Roberts guy. (And let's not forget that the Massachusetts governor was for health care before he was against it...)

Tam makes excellent points.  Her logic is spot on.  But we hope she'll come around and vote Romney in November anyway, as we will.

We saw this photo of Chief Justice John Roberts taking the oath.

Was that a bible?  Because we are suspicious that it is something else entirely...

Chief Justice John Roberts had to take two oaths before serving on the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Oath and the Judicial Oath.  From the Court's website, here is the Constitutional Oath Chief Justice John Roberts said:

"I, John Roberts, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.  So help me God."

We are convinced he was not completely truthful when he took this oath, and we will not trust him to consider the Constitution in his future decisions.


A good 9-min Cavuto interview with Mark Levin found at MoonBattery:

No comments: