Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

The Wrath Of cons........


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> The Wrath Of cons........ Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/29/2012 5:30:07 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wrath-cons-chief-justice-john-roberts-bashed-traitor-casting-key-vote-uphold-health-care-law-article-1.1104064


"Wrath of Cons: Chief Justice John Roberts bashed as ‘traitor’ after casting key vote to uphold health care law

Said Republican Congressman Jack Kingston of Georgia, 'With #Obamacare ruling, I feel like I just lost two great friends: America and Justice Roberts.

Is Chief Justice John Roberts the new David Souter?

That’s what some were claiming after the surprise news that Roberts had provided the key fifth vote to uphold President Barack Obama’s health care law.

Souter was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1990 by former President George H.W. Bush, but became persona non grata within the Republican Party for often voting with the court’s liberal wing.

Roberts, on the other hand, has been a reliably conservative vote since he was appointed as chief justice by former President George W. Bush in 2005. He was derided by Democrats for his role in the controversial Citizens United decision, which allowed super PACs to flood the political landscape with massive amounts of money."


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There`s another quirky con-bunch who think Roberts is some sort of an evil genius, who did this so cons will win in Nov.......

Bit of a stretch, but cons are highly imaginative.


Who would have predicted cons would be calling Justice Roberts a traitor?


That....is pretty sad.


< Message edited by Owner59 -- 6/29/2012 5:33:11 PM >

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/29/2012 5:35:28 PM   
YSG


Posts: 1001
Joined: 8/6/2010
Status: offline 		Khaaan!!! Khaaan!!!

Sorry, couldent resist

_____________________________

Our duty is to hold ourselves responsible to the people. Every word, every act and every policy must conform to the people's interests, and if mistakes occur, they must be corrected - that is what being responsible to the people means- Mao Zedong

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/29/2012 5:38:46 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline 		See also http://www.collarchat.com/m_4155798/mpage_1/tm.htm

_____________________________

Curious about the "Sluts Vote" avatars? See http://www.collarchat.com/m_4133036/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#4133036

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/29/2012 6:08:32 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		Well.....aside of what Michael Whinersavage says.....


The different schools are dividing into....


Roberts was intimidated into "changing" his vote.....by the liberals.......(Is there evidence that he was going to vote against the law?Or is that more con-gibberish?)


Another school...say Roberts doesn`t want to be known as conservative...that he`s doing this for political reasons and to for self-image,self-interest......for show,to be popular.....


Not surprised cons would come up with such petty explanations......







_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 2:09:21 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		Well, there HAS TO be a libural conspiracy! There's NO WAY this could be legit.

Just like there's NO WAY Obama can legitimately be President.

If something is outside the Conservative Cognitive Framework, it just gets compartmentalized into their crackpot conspiracies.



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 2:19:49 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline 		It certainly is an unexpected surprise that at least one conservative on the bench can both think and decide things for himself. Yes, I guess most conservatives would be engraged that a fellow conservative did as he wished rather than be 'just another drone of the GOP'. Justice Roberts seems to be an old school fiscal conservative, but a social liberal. If he had voted with the other conservatives did (cus it was a no brainer they would vote that way before the trial started), the US Supreme Court would have lost a considerable chunk of its credibility. Given the 'Citizens United' case did some significant damage to the court's perception as 'In the best interests of America', the ACA was a means to shore up the damage. Plus, Justice Roberts, will be remembered for the significant events of the day. Would he like to be remembered as someone that decided things as an independent thinker, or a 'yes-man' of the GOP?

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 10:49:52 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Thing is, I don't think this added to his credibility, just his unpredictability.

Instead of towing the GOP line, he's managing the political standing of the court--still politicized, just differently. He's looking at his own reputation and the reputation of the Roberts Court, truly making it HIS court.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 11:01:33 AM   
defiantbadgirl


Posts: 2988
Joined: 11/14/2005
Status: offline 		My father thinks Roberts did it because he doesn't want to be remembered in history books years from now as the killer of health care reform. It makes sense to me too.

< Message edited by defiantbadgirl -- 6/30/2012 11:02:02 AM >

_____________________________


Only in the United States is the health of the people secondary to making money. If this is what "capitalism" is about, I'll take socialism any day of the week.


Collared by MartinSpankalot May 13 2008

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 11:08:51 AM   
DaNewAgeViking


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
...the US Supreme Court would have lost a considerable chunk of its credibility.

What? They have credibility after Citizens United?

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 12:00:15 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaNewAgeViking


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
...the US Supreme Court would have lost a considerable chunk of its credibility.

What? They have credibility after Citizens United?




You gotta admit, Roberts renewed some of that lost credibility with his ACA vote. Maybe that's what it was all about?

Only time, and his future votes will tell.


(in reply to DaNewAgeViking)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 12:19:16 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline 		This guy get's it... It's too bad you don't.

quote:


(1) I am absolutely overjoyed that the Court has upheld the Affordable Care Act, and that the vision of universal coverage is closer today than it was yesterday.

(2) As a long term legal matter, Chief Justice Roberts: (a) now has himself a previously non-existent limit on Congress’s Commerce Clause power, and (b) a previously unrecognized limit on Congress’s Spending Clause power. He will have these limits at his disposal over his next 20+ years as leader of the Roberts Court.

(3) As political matter, his maneuvering was absolutely genius. He has (a) protected the institution of the Court; (b) forced Obama and the Democrats in Congress to acknowledge that the mandate is a tax and, thus, they have raised taxes on earners under $250,000; and (c) ensured that, as a tax, the mandate can be repealed by reconciliation — i.e., a bare majority of both Houses and the signature of a Republican President.

Roberts got his limitation on federal power and got to ingeniously play the political game without receiving any fault for doing so.

And, most importantly, the uninsured will now get insurance.




< Message edited by subrob1967 -- 6/30/2012 12:21:13 PM >

_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to erieangel)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 2:13:19 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline 		Then why all the wailing and gnashing of teeth?

_____________________________

Curious about the "Sluts Vote" avatars? See http://www.collarchat.com/m_4133036/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#4133036

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 3:03:08 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		Actually Roberts does not have a limit on either power. There was no majority on his interpretation of either. The Scalia dissent, The Thomas dissent and Roberts majority opinion, which the 4 liberal justices objected to and did not join the commerce clause and taxing stuff, all disagree on the extent of the Commerce Clause, Thomas's dissent is specifically on that subject alone.

So why did Roberts act as he did? I don't think anyone believes he did it out of a belief in the constitutionality of the law, the law is clearly constitutional under existing Commerce Clause precedent including Raich. I think he did it to protect his power and 'place in history.' He knows the people have lost a lot of respect for the Court over the last 12 years, Bush v Gore and CU as well as Scalia's and Thomas's ethical lapses and the conservative blocs entanglement in conservative politics. Another ruling deemed political by the people and it would be trivial for Obama and a Democratic Congress to expand the court to 11 and render Roberts utterly irrelevant. Roberts is hanging his hat on the Court's conservative bloc keeping a low profile till 2017 and that Scalia and Kennedy will last till then. I'd guess we'll see a return to Roberts previous modus operandi of providing minor RW victories in minor cases that get little news coverage and either not taking high profile cases or being the one to break ranks with the other cons when Kennedy won't.

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 3:21:27 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG

Khaaan!!! Khaaan!!!

Sorry, couldent resist



*Chortle*. I'll never forget Ricardo Montalban in that epic fake chest he wore throughout.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to YSG)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 5:17:20 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Is Chief Justice John Roberts the new David Souter?

My guess: probably not.

The Atlantic offered an interesting take on the CJ:

In Health Care Ruling, Roberts Steals a Move From John Marshall's Playbook

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 8:20:06 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Is Chief Justice John Roberts the new David Souter?

My guess: probably not.

The Atlantic offered an interesting take on the CJ:

In Health Care Ruling, Roberts Steals a Move From John Marshall's Playbook


I tired to explain that, but everyone thinks I'm nuts.

_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 8:25:19 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		You really didn't. Read the article.

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 10:27:49 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

You really didn't. Read the article.


Yeah, I did. And I did.

Roberts not only limited the Dems use of the commerce clause, he forced Obama to have to explain how a tax really isn't a tax, when the only way his policy is constitutionally legal, is as a tax.

_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 10:46:02 PM   
hlen5


Posts: 5890
Joined: 3/2/2008
Status: offline 		I have a question. How is it that Roberts is the 5th vote? How do they number them so that his was number 5? Couldn't any of the other of the majority votes be considered number 5?

So should it really matter who casts the deciding vote?

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: The Wrath Of cons........ - 6/30/2012 10:55:50 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		IN a Court that typically votes on partisan lines...whoever "decides" the case (not Kennedy this time) gets to be the critical 5th vote.

(in reply to hlen5)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> The Wrath Of cons........ Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.156