ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

Obamacare Decision: Why the Chief Justice Failed for All Sides

Updated on July 3, 2012

Repubs, Dems, and Supreme Court Lost!

Here we go again. Just when I think I’ve written enough on this subject, more and more information trickles out. I guess since this decision came out on my birthday, June 28th, I may see more significance from this issue than most people. But, instead of a “birthday present” of the mandate being struck down, it was like Aunt Matilda getting to sing the “You look like a monkey” version of ”Happy Birthday” to me. The decision was like your parents stating to you as an adult, “All these years we loved you, but never liked you”.

This law was written as a mandate under the commerce clause and not a tax. Any network TV channel can pull up the interviews with Obama where he states, “This is by no means a tax and never will be”.

In his own words!!! America, you've been duped!

Now that the chief justice Roberts rewrote the law and passed it as a tax, I am struggling to figure out why the liberals are royally ticked off and the republicans are finding some comfort in the ruling. Both the liberal and conservative justices on both sides of the court are livid at his “riding the fence” on this issue. Grumblings have even leaked out that since the end of May, Justice Kennedy tried to change his mind back to the conservative side of the ruling.

Justice Roberts' statements were quoted in dictum, meaning that zilcho of his statements could be used as precedent moving forward. In laymen's terms, this means he was giving his personal opinion and not his professional opinion. To all the giddy republicans declaring the protection of the commerce clause and the medicaid expansion strikedown for the states as silver linings to this ruling, "COME DOWN FROM CLOUD NINE!!!".

Now don't get me wrong. I am a very positive person and sometimes like to put a positive spin on things. However, we conservatives need to channel our passion to November 2012 and beyond. We must vote conservatives into office and see that they follow through. We do not have to lose our country to these morons currently in power. Do not underestimate the power of the Tea Party and other conservative groups! We can and will rise to this occasion!


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • ib radmasters profile image

      ib radmasters 5 years ago from Southern California


      The real problem is that we don't have voters that think for themselves. There are blind loyal party voters, and then there are those voters that get their opinion from the talking heads.

      But where are the voters that are not loyal party voters, and don't make the media's opinion their own? I don't know the answer, I live in California.


    • Rob GQ profile image

      Rob GQ 5 years ago from Florida

      Yeah, the only new thing I found out about was the fact of Roberts' spouting off in dictum. His words about the commerce clause did nothing to protect it. I wish we could find a way to get our freedoms back. You're right, the answers will not be in either party. A third party would just take away support from Dems or Repubs. We almost will need Revolutionary type leaders to move forward. It's too bad Robert's cajunas were taken away, 'cause I feel he took us many steps back just by himself.

    • ib radmasters profile image

      ib radmasters 5 years ago from Southern California

      You really should have stopped before this hub, as it really doesn't add anything.

      History has shown that neither party has moved the country forward, but both parties have been responsible for making it stop or even go backwards.

      The worst offshoot of this SC decision is that it detracts from the real issues that need to be discussed by the candidates in their election campaign.

      The candidates were not talking about the real issues before the SC decision, and they are not inclined to talk about them now. It will just be part versus party like the Civil War.

      Another presidential election where nothing is resolved, but the voters stick to the loyal party vote, and the independents vote on whatever is the hottest at the election.

      A point that should be taken from this SC decision is the absurdity to make the law of the land from a simple majority. If the SC was forced to have a minimum of six to three, or even better seven to two for their verdicts there would be better law and better decisions.