Get PJ Media on your Apple

Unexamined Premises

In Praise of John Roberts

December 10th, 2013 - 1:26 pm
Why is this man smirking?

Why is this man smirking?

OK, not really praise; Roberts’s failure to strangle the Obamacare baby in its crib when he had the chance will go down alongside the Dred Scott decision as one of the greatest moral disasters in the history of the republic. The man in charge of enforcing the Constitution blinked when confronted with a triumphalist party and a then-popular president, forgetting that he, Roberts, would likely be in Washington long after Obama was gone. In an attempt to save the Supreme Court’s reputation and standing, he destroyed it.

Still, even if inadvertently, Roberts got one thing right: the Patient Deflection and Unaffordable Care Act is a tax, and nothing but a tax. A punitive, regressive tax, to be sure — but a tax nonetheless. A tax on ideological stupidity, as its supporters are just now learning. Just wait til the “employer mandate” kicks in.

Remember that the PDUCA has nothing whatsoever to do with “health care.” That was just the heartstring-tugging pretense to mask a breathtaking power grab by the Democrats. No one’s health will be improved by the passage of this law, although many may well be adversely affected. Nor it is even really about “insurance.” For how can we call covering pre-existing conditions “insurance”? You can only insure against something in the future, not something that’s already occurred. Call it a socialized risk pool, or some such, but don’t call it “insurance.”

No, what Obamacare is — and was always meant to be — is an onerous tax on the middle class, wearing the usual Leftist disguise of “compassion.” With soaring deductibles and higher premiums for all, but “subsidies” for some, it’s a huge transfer of wealth from those who can least afford it, prostituting the insurance companies (through which the monies will flow) in the service of a governmental enterprise both unasked for and constitutionally uncalled for.

In effect, what Obamacare does is destroy the concept of insurance completely: if your deductible soars to $6,250 (the “bronze” plan) — meaning the amount you will have to pay out of your own pocket — then you might as well not have “insurance” at all, and simply pay a fee for service, at much lower rates. Meanwhile, your “premiums” become an entirely new, unplanned-for expense that will net you… nothing you didn’t already have before. Far better to simply buy catastrophic insurance and otherwise pay as you go.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Exactly. If the Court had struck down the ACA, imagine the Democrat & Leftist (but I repeat myself) reaction: "Conservative white Christian men took away your free healthcare! Vote Democrat & give the Supreme Court back to Teh Peepul!" Exactly as 9/11 forced many of us to acknowledge the jihadi threat, the disaster of Big Government can no longer be fantasized away. Chief Justice Roberts just might have saved us all...
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
" Maybe the next time the Roberts Court has a chance to put this thing out of its misery, it’ll take it..."

The part about forced coverage of birth control anyway, but not the whole monstrosity which a single SCOTUS guy might have quashed.

Was John Roberts influenced at the last moment by some ill founded wish to not (further) compromise the Court's status by appearing to mess with the legislative process ? Does his seizure medication interfere with cognitive function ?

Thomas Jefferson warned extensively about a Supreme Court overstepping its boundaries.

I hard to even believe that the question of whether or not a private business can be forced by the federal gov't. to cover employees' contraception is even going before the Supreme Court.

How far we've fallen.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Yes, Michael...however...

I believe if Roberts had cast his vote with Scalia, the hard lesson the useful/useless idiots HAD TO learn, would have been missing. Scalia was right, of course. He is the best and the brightest on this Court...which is why he is the most slandered. Thomas is slandered because he repudiates the "victim class mandate".

Yet, the ONLY way to trump guilt-tripping and permanent propaganda that passes for Democrat "Party" politics...is to have the dim and the dull experience it.

Obamacare is not a tax, it was argued to the public. It is a tax, it was argued to the Court.

How could they lie to us?!!?! It's easy when you are so practiced at it and you have no conscience.

Yet, it really is NOT a tax. It's forced reparations...payback.

When Michael Pfleger put on that cringeworthy minstrel act about "yo 401k and yo daddy's 401k and yo grand daddy's 401k", he let the cat out of the bag...claws, fangs and furball.

Obamacare is about "redistribution". Punishment for sins of the father. Yes, race.

It is an ugly sentiment that squares the circle of the global warming hoax. It connects the dots to the CRA-created crash of the economy. It attritions out the bitter clingers that AYERS and The Weathermen wanted to murder.

Pfleger foretold the real attitude that Obama masked. Yo health and yo daddy's health and yo gran daddy's health...don't mean spit to these people. No...God damn America...is what the man closest to Obama said.

Don't turn your back on your people, don't buy into what "the man" tells you, Obama learned at the knee of Frank Marshall Davis. And Don Warden.

Guilty as hell...and free as a bird. An object lesson from Bill Ayers.

You can take down an entire country through its banks, a lesson from George Soros.

Israel and America can be torn apart, learned at dinners with Rashid Khalidi.

No, Michael...Obamacare is not a tax. It is a vehicle intended to carry Pandora's Box of small c communist ills and smother the "oppressors" with them. It was never intended to "work" as "insurance". It was intended to work as penance. Retribution. Payback. Punishment.

It's a Trojan Hearse.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (60)
All Comments   (60)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated

I’m actually tired of having to post this crap over and over and over but seems very few “get” it.
Obamcare has nothing to do with a tax or whatever it was supposed to be according to Roberts.
It has everything to do with Roberts having the sh_t blackmailed out of him by the regime!!!
Robert's wife insisted on adopting blue-eyed blond- haired children from her parents home county of Cork, Ireland.
She found two mothers willing to give up a boy and a girl. Turns out it’s really hard to adopt them directly from Ireland to the US so they had the birth mothers go to Central America where they were adopted by the Roberts and sent to the US.
Evidently this fast and loose game did not go unnoticed by the regime.
When the time was right they most likely asked Roberts to choose between “0” care and his kids. Guess what he picked?
Here’s some documentation that is hard to refute since its from the NYT among others!

http://www.t-room.us/2013/01/unraveling-the-mystery-behind-chief-justice-roberts-sudden-switch-to-rule-in-favor-of-obamacare/

Heres’ a clip from the link.

“(Editor’s Note: Found the below post when reading headlines over at WhatReallyHappened dot com. The headline reads “How Roberts was blackmailed to support ObamaCare” and it was written by a poster at the Liberty Caucus blog who goes by the user name “Trip.” This poster has done some digging into Supreme Court Justice John Roberts adoption of two Irish children born months apart by two different mothers, which in and of itself is fairly benign, but there is a problem, the laws governing adoption in Ireland are clear–“all adoptions go through [a] government board, An Bord Uchtala” including what American’s call “private adoption.” Yet, the Roberts adopted these two children through an unspecified Latin American country. If, and this is a really BIG IF, but if the Robert’s adoption of these two children circumvented Ireland’s laws by having the mothers transported to a Latin American country with friendly adoption laws to give birth, well then the Chief Justice may have very well have broken a few laws and IF, again, this is a really BIG IF, if someone in DC learned of these facts who is to say they may not be using them to blackmail the Chief Justice? We know former Illinois Sen. Ryan’s sealed divorce records mysteriously became public when he was running against Mr. Obama in 2004. Who is to say a similar tactic wasn’t used to convince Roberts to be the swing vote that brought us Obamacare? It’s as good a theory as any other. Roberts did switch his vote at the last minute…why?) - See more at: http://www.t-room.us/2013/01/unraveling-the-mystery-behind-chief-justice-roberts-sudden-switch-to-rule-in-favor-of-obamacare/#sthash.hU6N1Aqn.dpuf";;
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What he said.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I have begun to wonder if Roberts had forseen the spin-crash-burn of liberalism. If he had ended obamacare we might have gotten complacent about the grand plans of the Left and they may have been able to get enough sympathy for other plans like Amnesty for Illegals. The way this is happening we are all being directly hurt by obamacare and now that the injury is personal, not just political, people are more likely to get off their duffs and vote in the 2014 mid-term. Is Roberts that subtle?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I wonder if Obama had something on Roberts to cause him to vote the way he did. The fact that the Congress can force an individual to purchase something he doesn't want is beyound me. Next will they force us all to purchase Volts?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I've opposed ObamaCare from the beginning of it's condition for all of these reasons. It's bewildered my friends, as I do have quite a lot of preconditions, and probably would not be able to buy a plan on the individual market as it stands. I have argued that we need to destroy the oligopolies we have in each state (that are reinforce in this plan), and in the far more liquid economy that we would create in that economy we could make an advantage in every insurance plan. I'm jumping in glee at the disaster ObamaCare has created, but it's come to a time that I think the GOP should propose an alternative healthcare law as well as clamor for ObamaCare's repeal.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I am a 61 yer old female whose has had a hysterectomy, so I am more than upset that I have to pay for maternity care & birth control pills for myself. However, I am REJOICING at paying for birth control pills & abortions for others...why? Because, IF these females breed, their offspring are very likely to be drug addicted, neglected or abused & if these offspring make it into grade school in a public (government) school they will be indoctrinated into the government school mindset, recruited into gangs, drug addicted themselves (Ritalin and/or street drugs...take your pick) & if they make it to high school, & can find a gun, will become the next Adam Lanza. For these offspring, it's best for us all if they are not allowed their fist breath of air. Suddenly, when these likelihood's come into focus, taxpayer supported birth control pills & abortion are at the very least, a cheaper burden on the taxpayer, & at best a preemptive drawdown on the welfare roles...viva birth control pills & abortion!!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Ugh. It's murder. I know because I'm an RN and worked in an abortion clinic, an experience which opened my eyes and changed me to pro life.

Abortion on demand cannot be justified.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Nobody blackmailed or intimidated or bamboozled Roberts into siding with socialism. He's been on that team all along.

He's a mole. Or rather, was a mole. He was "activated" when the right time came, and his cover's been pretty well blown now. Expect more bad rulings from him.

Why do I say he was a mole?

John Roberts worked for Reagan. He was given the job of vetting potential SCOTUS nominees. He's the guy who gave a glowing, two thumbs up, report to a certain potential candidate, despite her being a well-known abortion activist.

That's why Reagan nominated Sandra Day O'Connor.

Roberts didn't get "turned".

Reagan & GW got suckered.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
In another generation or 2 there might not even be a need for a Supreme Court.
Our constitutional republic is being transformed into something different from what it was intended to be. We don't really know yet what it will be only that it
will NOT be a constitutional republic. Perhaps a Parliament style system where the majority just basically dictates and the minority whines.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The US Supreme Court is a joke, it's just a rubber stamp for the other 2 branches of power hungry politicians.

How independent can the Court really be, when every justice in it had to pass through a gauntlet of interviews and background checks from the Executive and Legislative branches?

Does anyone really think they are fighting for State and Personal rights, against their friends in the other 2 branches that gave them their jobs?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
So how would you get justices on the Supreme Court? Direct election? Just curious....
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
They dug up some dirt on Roberts at the last minute. Maybe he's a closeted homosexual. Maybe he had an affair ten years ago and they found his love emails in all that NSA metadata. But he was not his own creature when he wrote that decision. Count on it. It's the Chicago way.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
After I heard his decision, I told my Hubby that Roberts must be a charter member of the Jerry Sandusky "admiration for little boys club"!!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Nope. He's a mole.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
When they first passed the Constitution the Rich States were nervous the Federal Government would tax them more than the smaller poor states so there was a provision in the Constitution that is still there that says the Federal Government must tax all the States proportionally. When A. Lincoln's War Congress tried an income tax to pay the extraordinary cost of putting down the rebellion and eradicating human slavery in the southern half of the country that was fomenting that rebellion eventually someone petitioned SCOTUS, after the rebellion was put down, that this "income tax" was not proportional among the states and was for that reason unconstitutional. SCOTUS agreed. To get around this logical conclusion, Rockefeller, his sone in law, and Morgan and the boys at Jeckyl Island had to pass a Constitutional Amendment to bring the Income Tax back with the Federal Reserve (private banks printing governmental money????) which they did in 1912.

What's the point? Obama exempted certain states from the Obamacare tax. It has nothing to do with income. It is not proportionally assessed between the states. It is not based on income.

It was specifically passed by Congress not as a Tax and then upheld by Scotus as a tax.

I would say it is Unconstitutional on that basis.

Where was the Congressional effort to make it

a) proportional among the states (some were exempted)

b) based on income. Preexisting conditions were exempted regardless of income.

Back to Black Robed Chamber I would say.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Roberts left the door open for Congress to do just that. Unfortunately, there wasn't enough GOP/conservatives to do so at the time. Also unfortunately, it's extremely difficult for one branch of government to sue another branch through the third. Separation of powers and all that.
It SHOULD have been up to the people to dump the Democrats who voted for it w/o even reading it and repeal it. That's what Robert's opinion expressly advised.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 Next View All