Holy Sh8, it was Roberts!!

[Anonymous]

Wow!!! The guy youngish put on the Court by the Republicans to protect the Right for the next 20 years just voted for the biggest liberal bill of all time. WOW!!!!

[Anonymous]

You are an idiot. Roberts is a judge, not a politician. This decision is not "liberal" or "conservative," it's "law."

[Anonymous]

Tell that to Scalia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tell that to Scalia.

Seriously. Conservatives spew out "judicial activist" like it's such a vile thing, and yet Scalia is one the BIGGEST judicial activists on the Supreme Court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are an idiot. Roberts is a judge, not a politician. This decision is not "liberal" or "conservative," it's "law."

Yeah. Because judicial philosophy is never tilted to the right or the left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are an idiot. Roberts is a judge, not a politician. This decision is not "liberal" or "conservative," it's "law."

If recognizing that reality does not always match the ideal makes one an idiot, most of us have been idiots since we learned that there is no Santa Clause. Fortunately, in this case Roberts found the sanity clause.

[Anonymous]

he should resign, there will be a petition

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:he should resign, there will be a petition

Wrong. He's appointed for life. He is not held to decide one way or the other. it's his choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:he should resign, there will be a petition

You're funny.

[Anonymous]

Am I allowed to send him a present?

[Anonymous]

I suddenly find him quite hot.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I suddenly find him quite hot.

hilarious!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:he should resign, there will be a petition

You can petition your little butt off. THe point of a lifetime appointment is to protect them from hillbillies with pitchforks like yourself.

[Anonymous]

I don't get it, really. It seems like he wanted this and fished around for a reason to uphold it. Or, he really felt the legal argument about taxes held water. In either case, the law has been upheld. How can he make this decision without considering the political and human implications of this?

It comes as a huge surprise to me, yet health care is not a Republican or Democratic issue. Illness strikes indiscriminately, and once you've been struck, you see the value of this program. I'm wondering if Roberts has a personal connection to this, which fueled his decision. Or did he simply buy the argument about Congressional power to impose taxes?