ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Chief Justice Robert's shocks America! But why?

Updated on July 2, 2012

I wondered why a G.W. Bush appointee would rule as he did. Then, a wild suspicion hit me! Though it will sound wild, do what modern day Americans have ceased doing, which stop and ask yourself a few questions.

It is this writer's opinion that the Chief Justice may have been fed up with the current president and decided to do something about it. Again, this is just my speculation and I am asking "what if". What if, Justice Roberts wanted to quiet our president down after President obama's shots toward the court? The statements about setting precedence were untrue and the justices appeared to be unhappy about it.

So, how could this possibly be seen as a move against President Obama? It's quite simple, actually. Think about it. Roberts, being the Chief Justice was afforded the opportunity to articulate and present the decision. In the decision he cited the Consumer Clause, stating that the Government can not force you to sign up for and buy insurance. That means that not only is the unpopular "Obama Care" law still in affect, but now it has to be considered and collected as a tax! Stop and think. Roberts just gave the president a "Read my lips, no new taxes" moment! This is the largest tax ever, and this one will be greatly felt!

Not only will the health care law be an issue that hurts The President in November, but now he has to explain why the middle class are going to get hit with a tax that he promised would never come! President Obama promised that there would be no new taxes on those making less than $250,000 per year. Now, this law does levy a tax. Because of the Commerce Clause it can not be a penalty, and must be considered a tax. This will be another hurdle for the President. He has an unpopular Solyndra, a ballooning deficit, unemployment over 8% (which he promised would never happen), and now a new tax for all of us(which he promised would never happen).

This will not bode well for Obama considering the fact that he is already in a tough fight for re-election! So I ask you, what was the motive behind the Chief Justice's decision?


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • MikeSyrSutton profile image

      MikeSyrSutton 5 years ago from An uncharted galaxy

      Actually, that is what he said he did. He stated that this was constitutional and could be upheld.

    • profile image 5 years ago from upstate, NY

      No doubt defining the individual mandate as a tax will hurt Obama and the democrats but Roberts job isn't to make law, its to interprete the Constitution according to its original intent. I think Romney will win in November with a landslide, at this point in 1980 Reagan trailed Carter by 9 points, as of today Romney and Obama are in a dead heat but no president since ww2 has won reelection with 8% unemployment and a terrible economy! Roberts ruling troubles me because of the dangerous precedent he set- his job isn't to try to shape our society with his great wisdom-that's what the liberal progressives have been doing since FDR- Roberts may not like it but he is only supposed to interprete the Constitution!

    • MikeSyrSutton profile image

      MikeSyrSutton 5 years ago from An uncharted galaxy

      Thanks for the great comments! Keep them coming.

    • Two Minute Review profile image

      Two Minute Review 5 years ago from Pennsylvania, United States

      I think Roberts has done more to frame the debate with one ruling than Romney and Obama could have done if you gave them another 6 months!! Obama's surrogates are falling all over themselves trying to explain why it's NOT a tax (which is exceedingly fun to watch), but unless they sit on the Supreme Court, their opinion matters little. Romney can say it's a tax (though I think he'd rather talk about jobs and the economy in other contexts), and hit Obama with it the way that Clinton hit Bush in 1992. Ironically, the people who will be hit by this tax will be those with little disposable income (read: the poor). How sad that the "party of the little guy" just stuck it to the little guy....

    • samsons1 profile image

      Sam 5 years ago from Tennessee

      Yes, I agree. The Judicial Branch can only interpret the Law, not make it. That's congresses job; what an excellent opportunity to replace the do nothing, cry baby democrats that don't have a plan, just cry, complain and blame George Bush and try to rig the elections. It's just about time to hear from Acorn again-- Voted up, useful and shared...

    • Davesworld profile image

      Davesworld 5 years ago from Cottage Grove, MN 55016

      Only John Roberts knows why he did what he did. Unless and until he decides to write a memoir, all we can do is guess. Like you, and contrary to much that is written here on Hub pages, I think the health care law is going to be damaging to Democrats again this year just like it was two years ago.