XPost: alt.fan.neal.boortz, alt.politics.usa, alt.politics.usa.constitution   
   XPost: alt.politics.obama, rec.arts.tv   
   From: emoneyjoe@iglou.com   
      
   On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 13:00:00 -0400, Neal Boortz  wrote:   
      
   >No Šsorry.  I can? figure out just what Chief Justice John Roberts was   
   >trying to accomplish with his ruling on ObamaCare last week.  And no ŠI   
   >don? pretend to know how this is going to work itself out in the   
   >election and for future court decisions.  I can, though, just throw out   
   >some random thoughts on the subject Šsee what you think.   
   >   
   >First ŠRoberts.  Did he just change his mind on some important issue of   
   >established law?  I think not.  I think that it? possible that Roberts   
   >felt the pressure of the liberal media ?particularly The New York Times   
   >?and changed his vote on ObamaCare to keep the court from becoming the   
   >focal point of a liberal onslaught.  I?e heard pundits say that Roberts   
   >took this tact in order to trick (so to speak) the Court? liberals to   
   >sign on to a ruling severely limiting the operation of the commerce   
   >clause.  This way he has supposedly stalled the growth of big government.   
   > That makes no sense.  Roberts could have just as easily put the brakes   
   >on the use of the commerce club to expand government by siding with the   
   >conservative majority.   
   >   
   >The bigger question here now is just who does this help in the election?   
   >Consider this:  Will the moochers and parasites and their liberal keepers   
   >be more enthused about rushing to the polls to vote for Caesar Obammus   
   >because of this ruling?  Hardly.  Nothing has changed for them.  Their   
   >precious ObamaCare ?their attempt to expand our entitlement society ?is   
   >safe.  Republican, libertarian and conservative voters, on the other   
   >hand, are outrage.  And here? an interesting twist:  If Justice Kennedy   
   >had simply sided with the liberals on the court to create a 5-4 decision   
   >to uphold ObamaCare under the Commerce Clause, the decision certainly   
   >wouldn? have outraged conservatives as much as has the Roberts?ploy.   
   >Conservatives may feel that the Supreme Court has become a permanent   
   >rubber stamp for the leftist expansion of American government.  This   
   >twisting and turning to approve the ObamaCare mandate as an exercise of   
   >the government? taxing authority tells the right that the court will to   
   >go any length to support Obama and the Democrats.   Now conservatives   
   >think that the only way to hold back the government is to remove Obama   
   >and as many Democrats as possible from their positions of power.   
   >Conservative voters are energized.  Whether or not they stay that way is   
   >another question Šafter all, popular culture creates a lot of   
   >diversions.   
   >   
   >But ?and many conservative voters know this ?the 2012 election may very   
   >well be America? Last Chance.   
      
          Vote 'em all out.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)