Conservatives turn on Roberts, Supreme Court after health care ruling

[jlujan69]

Conservatives turn on Roberts, Supreme Court after health care ruling | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Say, when was the last time the entire Congress turned on the court for a decision instead of just one party or the other? Now, that would really demonstrate its supposed neutrality--get everybody mad at you.

 

[Rion]

Obama's already turned on Roberts.

 

[jayem]

"Only 27 percent of Republicans surveyed by Gallup last week said they had a favorable opinion of Roberts,"

Why would they be upset with the CJ for upholding a Republican idea?

 

[Rion]

"Only 27 percent of Republicans surveyed by Gallup last week said they had a favorable opinion of Roberts,"

Why would they be upset with the CJ for upholding a Republican idea?

Going by that logic, the Democrats should still support Eugenics.

 

[Creech]

The Supreme Court has a history of spinning and stretching the Constitution and not looking to how the founders intended it.

 

[jgarden]

A Supreme Court Justice who didn't "rubber stamp" the political agenda of the political party whose leader appointed him deserves the Congressional Gold Medal.

So much for the strategy that by stacking the Supreme Court with conservatives was going to overturn Roe v Wade.

 

[jayem]

Going by that logic, the Democrats should still support Eugenics.

My point is that if Repubs are ticked, it should be at themselves--not Roberts. The CJ is just saying that if someone made a mess, he's not gonna clean it up for them.

 

[TLK Valentine]

My point is that if Repubs are ticked, it should be at themselves--not Roberts. The CJ is just saying that if someone made a mess, he's not gonna clean it up for them.

What? The Supreme Court is not the enforcement arm of the Republican party? Color me shocked.

 

[Rion]

My point is that if Repubs are ticked, it should be at themselves--not Roberts. The CJ is just saying that if someone made a mess, he's not gonna clean it up for them.

Roberts chose what he did for fear of making the SCOTUS look bad, which is why he desperately tried to get Kennedy to go along with him. Nothing else.

 

[Rion]

Here's a snippet from an article called Libertarianism for Dummies, but it works for most conservatives too:

3. Myth: Libertarians are selfish.
Some libertarians are selfish, but libertarians are no more likely to be selfish than non-libertarians. You see, libertarians don’t think compassion is something you leave at the voting booth. And if it’s compulsory, it’s not really compassion at all, is it? Self-interest is certainly a part of our worldview. To deny one’s natural inclinations toward pursuing happiness is just kooky asceticism (unless, of course, asceticism somehow makes you happy.) We also know prosperity is the result of “selfish” people going about their business — trucking, bartering and trading.​

But people have selfless instincts, too. So how should people manifest those instincts, by actively looking after our neighbors or by watching MSNBC and whining about the rich? Libertarians are charitable to the extent that human beings are charitable. We happen to think individuals are better at making decisions about charity than central authorities. In fact, we consider it morally lazy to conflate higher taxes and forced redistribution with compassion. And we consider it strange to justify coercion by appeal to compassion. Think about it: Would it be morally justified for me to walk up to a man on the street and hold him up at gunpoint if I planned to give his money to charity? If not, what does a mob of voters and a corruptible legislature add to this story?




​

 

[SharonL]

I'm not going to throw Roberts under the bus just yet. He just might have made it possible to get rid of this mess. By making it a tax, it can be overturned with 51 votes instead of the 61 to repeal it. They have the 51 votes - would be almost impossible to get the 61.

 

[cow451]

Roberts chose what he did for fear of making the SCOTUS look bad, which is why he desperately tried to get Kennedy to go along with him. Nothing else.

Now let me get this straight. Conservatives have been saying all along that the mandate was a tax. The court agreed. Conservatives didn't want Medicaid expansion by force. The court agreed. Conservatives said the mandate violated the Commerce Clause that limits Congress' ability to regulate interstate commerce. The court agreed. Sounds like a "triple play" for conservatives.

So why all the wailing and knashing of teeth?

 

[Rion]

Now let me get this straight. Conservatives have been saying all along that the mandate was a tax. The court agreed. Conservatives didn't want Medicaid expansion by force. The court agreed. Conservatives said the mandate violated the Commerce Clause that limits Congress' ability to regulate interstate commerce. The court agreed. Sounds like a "triple play" for conservatives.

So why all the wailing and knashing of teeth?

We said it was a mandated tax. Roberts said it was a tax, but not mandated. Huge difference.

 

[cow451]

We said it was a mandated tax. Roberts said it was a tax, but not mandated. Huge difference.

Every tax is a mandated tax.

 

[Rion]

Not according to Roberts.

 

[RedPaddy]

Just waiting here for the first executive order to simply not fund it.

 

[NotreDame]

"Only 27 percent of Republicans surveyed by Gallup last week said they had a favorable opinion of Roberts,"

Why would they be upset with the CJ for upholding a Republican idea?

It was a Republican idea in the past but ideas held by the party can and do change. After all, it was a Democratic Party idea, a long time ago, to secede from the Union but I'd hardly attribute the idea to the Democratic Party of today.

 

[RedPaddy]

It was a Republican idea in the past but ideas held by the party can and do change. After all, it was a Democratic Party idea, a long time ago, to secede from the Union but I'd hardly attribute the idea to the Democratic Party of today.

some things are more unfortunate than others.

 

[BleedingHeart]

If you mean that is what was leaked by SCOTUS clerks, etc. then yes, you've heard it a million times from a million news agencies.

http://m.cbsnews.com/m/8301-3460_16...re-law/?pageNum=2&tag=contentMain;contentBody

You proved he changed his mind. People do that. What I'm not finding evidence of is that he changed his mind only because people who had no chance of voting him out would think he's too conservative. That doesn't make sense.

 

[Rion]

You proved he changed his mind. People do that. What I'm not finding evidence of is that he changed his mind only because people who had no chance of voting him out would think he's too conservative. That doesn't make sense.

Did you read the whole thing?

Over the next six weeks, as Roberts began to craft the decision striking down the mandate, the external pressure began to grow. Roberts almost certainly was aware of it.

There's more articles on it. This was just the original report.