About Chief Justice Roberts . . . . A counterintuitive observation from James in Hayward

John RobertsJames in Hayward thinks that the Supreme Court’s Obamacare decision might have been a blessing in disguise:

Yep, John looks better all the while. If SCOTUS had knocked down that utopian hogwash, Demorats would be having a field day parroting about how the Repubs have destroyed America’s chance for decent health care. I don’t think the Justice was being blackmailed, I think he had contacts in Canada who informed him of the pub gossip.

And have you considered that Obama and Putin are two sides of the same fool’s gold coin? Perhaps a Euro.

History is made up of “what ifs.” Certainly Obama would be in a more powerful position now if he didn’t have Obamacare and could spend his time decrying Republican cruelty. As it is, even with all the media cover he’s been getting, Americans are getting a good look at socialism’s reality.

(An aside: I love James’ neologism — “Demorats”.)

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Matt_SE says

    I’m torn on this one.
    On the one hand, I’ve said that Obama is just a symptom and the real problem is the people that elected (and re-elected) him. To wake these people up, the abject failure that is Socialism must be exposed through its implementation. Pain, in other words.
     
    On the other hand, “the best laid plans…”
    I wouldn’t willingly embrace adoption of a “3-D chess” strategy with so many moving parts that you couldn’t be reasonable sure of its success. That’s what the “John Roberts is a genius” position advocates.
     
    I would rather say, Socialism was adopted and given the chance to (inevitably) fail as a purely coincidental by-product of Roberts’ bad decision.

  2. says

    The thing people assume under the Left is that people are free to make their own decisions. Because that’s what the propaganda drills into them.
     
    The reality is somewhat different.

  3. Danny Lemieux says

    I stand vindicated, as I posited on this esteemed site that John Roberts’ decision was right: the people had voted in the people who created Obamacare and it would have to be through the people that it would have to be repealed.
     
    Roberts argued that it was not the responsibility of SCOTUS to rewrite law. The only way that we will regain our country is by the majority of the voting public being smacked good and hard between the eyes with two 2 x 4s called “reality” and “consequences”.
     
    Had SCOTUS interfered with the implementation of Obamacare, we would all still be dying the death of a thousand Progressive cuts in a state of drugged delirium.

    • says

      1+1 is not vindication of anything, nor is it necessary for independent minds to need vindication from others in the crowd.
       
      No proof has been presented that Roberts was free of influence when he did what he did.

  4. Charles Martel says

    Danny, I’m not so sure that college kids, favored minorities, progressive religionists, “liberated” women, and the millions of other government-trough fanciers are going to view that bitch slap from reality as anything more than an occasion to demand conservatives’ heads.

Leave a Reply