Skip to content

The Real Long Term Effect of the Cheif Justice Roberts Decision

  • by

Posted by GONV (Grizzled Old Nam Vet)   July 2nd, 2012 05:50 MST

I ran across to this article that comes close to expressing a thought, or theory if you well that I came to after I got over the initial anger I felt after hearing the Supreme Court decision.


A realistic view of the decision would have to conclude that Chief Justice Roberts is fully responsible for the decision.


It took me about a day after the decision to actually calm down enough to look at it from a slightly different view. The way I see it (and yes you could call this a conspiracy theory if you want to), maybe Roberts has come to the conclusion as many of us have – that if the Obama regime is maintained for another term, then the survival of the United States of America as a free country would be  just about nil.


So let’s assume that Roberts realizes this and made the decision to fall on the sword in order to save his country. The objective was to render a decision that would take down the completely lawless Obama administration along with a huge number of their Democrat followers in both the Senate and the House.

It’s just a thought and I would be curious to hear how many of the readers to this site may have come to the same conclusion. Please feel free to leave your comments.



Why Chief Justice Roberts Made the Right Long-Term Decision With ObamaCare

June 28, 2012 3:59 pm

Before you look to do harm to Chief Justice Roberts or his family, it’s important that you think carefully about the meaning – the true nature — of his ruling on Obama-care. The Left will shout that they won, that Obama-care was upheld and all the rest. Let them.

It will be a short-lived celebration.

Here’s what really occurred — payback. Yes, payback for Obama’s numerous, ill-advised and childish insults directed toward SCOTUS.

Chief Justice Roberts actually ruled the mandate, relative to the commerce clause, was unconstitutional. That’s how the Democrats got Obama-care going in the first place. This is critical. His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be.

Next, he stated that, because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must, to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax. Therefore, the mechanism that funds Obama-care is a tax. This is also critical. Recall back during the initial Obama-care battles, the Democrats called it a penalty, Republicans called it a tax. Democrats consistently soft sold it as a penalty. It went to vote as a penalty. Obama declared endlessly, that it was not a tax, it was a penalty. But when the Democrats argued in front of the Supreme Court, they said ‘hey, a penalty or a tax, either way’. So, Roberts gave them a tax. It is now the official law of the land — beyond word-play and silly shenanigans. Obama-care is funded by tax dollars. Democrats now must defend a tax increase to justify the Obama-care law.

Finally, he struck down as unconstitutional, the Obama-care idea that the federal government can bully states into complying by yanking their existing medicaid funding. Liberals, through Obama-care, basically said to the states — ‘comply with Obama-care or we will stop existing funding.’ Roberts ruled that is a no-no. If a state takes the money, fine, the Feds can tell the state how to run a program, but if the state refuses money, the federal government can’t penalize the state by yanking other funding. Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12, 25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national, is it?

Ultimately, Roberts supported states rights by limiting the federal government’s coercive abilities. He ruled that the government can not force the people to purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases.

Although he didn’t guarantee Romney a win, he certainly did more than his part and should be applauded.

And he did this without creating a civil war or having bricks thrown threw his windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.


SHARE this interesting piece with your friends by clicking the buttons below!


This article, written by I.M. Citizen, gives a much different perspective of Justice Robert’s decision. Comment below and let us know what you think. Also check out I.M. Citizen’s blog – quite interesting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *