jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (10 posts)

how long before justice roberts is called a socialist?

  1. wetbaknproud profile image68
    wetbaknproudposted 5 years ago

    the right wing nut talking heads are stunned by the supreme court ruling and by justice roberts' position in particular. How long before they start calling him a traitor and a socialist?

    1. PrettyPanther profile image83
      PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It didn't take long. 

      “And Roberts? Really? I expect this of Kennedy but him? Yet another stealth socialist/statist as other contributors have pointed out,” added a commenter at Michelle Malkin’s blog.

      http://www.politico.com/news/stories/06 … z1z8h37E13

      Edited to add: That is a commenter, not a talking head, but one of them will do it soon, if they haven't already.

      1. mio cid profile image41
        mio cidposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        wow so michelle malwebkin spearheaded the attack, limbaugh ,hannity, and levin contained themselves today they stopped just short of calling him a socialist but i guess they'll make up for it tomorrow.

        1. wetbaknproud profile image68
          wetbaknproudposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          michael savage said justice roberts  was impaired by  anti epilepsy medication thats why he sided with the majority

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
            Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Will his meds still be covered?

            1. mio cid profile image41
              mio cidposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              both these guys have no worries about affording their meds

  2. JBrumett profile image61
    JBrumettposted 5 years ago

    I'm pretty sure some people called him a socialist after his nomination didn't they?

    1. wetbaknproud profile image68
      wetbaknproudposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      No, he was supposed to be along with the other conservative justices the backbone of a supreme court that would rule 5 to 4 in  lockstep with whichever was the  republican position on any given matter.

      1. JBrumett profile image61
        JBrumettposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I don't know what books you read, but Justices don't rule based on party affiliations.  =-P  Thanks for the reply.

        1. wetbaknproud profile image68
          wetbaknproudposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          they shouldn't ,but the mindset in the head of the right wing nuts was , these are our guys they can't possibly rule against us.

 
working