Previous 21 - 30 Next
In response to:

John Roberts Makes His Career Move

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jul 03, 2012 12:38 PM
I was thinking along the same lines, Roberts has pretty much declared that his job is to rubber stamp any dictators whims so long as the dictator sits in a certain room in the white house.
In response to:

John Roberts Makes His Career Move

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jul 03, 2012 12:36 PM
Roberts should just go on permanent vacation and give his proxy vote to whichever leftist he chooses.
In response to:

John Roberts Makes His Career Move

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jul 03, 2012 12:35 PM
Of COURSE! Progressive angels will usher us in to big government nanny state nirvana if we would just ignore history, common sense, and above all give up any hopes of silly concepts of freedom or individualism! The commerce clause booby prize was a dicta, it will never be used to decide anything, try and at least sound intelligent. The expansion of the powers of taxation override the commerce clause with an easy path to dictating whatever they wish, so long as a tax is associated with it. So spout on in glorious ignorance to show the world how truly dense you are. You and your fellow progressive fascist brothers can celebrate right up until the day that you learn what the phrase "First against the wall" really means.
In response to:

John Roberts Makes His Career Move

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jul 03, 2012 12:27 PM
John Roberts is a traitor, pure and simple. The other four progressives are of course as well. The court is now nothing but a puppet show for the left, with Roberts own words he admits it has no care for the well being of the citizen, and no power to constrain government to it's constitutional role, and is instead a simple rubber stamp of tyrannical approval. May Roberts burn in hell along with every other progressive
This is serious delusion, Roberts had no intention of making a political statement against Obama. If you really believe that this was some kind of Jedi Mind Trick then you have to believe that the other constitutional leaning justices are air heads and that anger was feigned or misplaced and that they are dunces. Roberts is an opportunist that wanted to please the NYT and the other public opinion makers so that he could feel good about himself. He is a traitor to the constitution and will be remembered as one of the biggest fools that has ever sat on the bench
"...Chief Justice John Roberts’ judicial sleight of hand" That statement alone should cause Robert's to hand his head in shame and to resign (after the next election) but opportunistic cowards have no moral compass so he will probably be there until the day he dies (may that happen on Romney's inauguration day, and as a bonus the other 4 traitors as well)
In response to:

Is that a Wink or a Blink?

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jul 03, 2012 12:10 PM
Roberts is a true coward, he caved to what he perceived as negative public opinion from "People that mattered", that fact that he is not bright enough to figure out that he lives in the DC bubble is irrelevant and I believe his decision will be mocked from now until the death of the Republic (which may have already occurred) The SCOTUS is not the latest American Idol knock off, or at least it should not be, and the fact the Roberts does not think that the constitution should be a check on overreaching politicians is simply amazing to me.
In response to:

Ben Parker Was Right

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jul 03, 2012 12:05 PM
I think the only people that should be qualified are ones that are labeled "Radical Orginalists" and all others should be rejected out of hand. "Judicial Constraint" is now a code word for "Rape the Constitution if at all possible"
In response to:

Ben Parker Was Right

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jul 03, 2012 12:03 PM
Exactly, in essence he has said it's not his job to constrain government to it's constitutional limits, and if he believes that then he needs to step down (after the next election!) He then went on to say how it could be constitutional and therefore it was constitutional, which simply boggles the mind.
In response to:

Ben Parker Was Right

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jul 03, 2012 12:01 PM
What Roberts really said was "Constitution? We don't need no stinking Constitution!" I am sorry but if the Constitution is not there to clearly layout what government can do, and thereby limit what they cannot do then what is it for? I interpret Benedict Roberts statement as "If you think we are here to constrain government to it's constitutional limits then you are sorely mistaken" That being the case, abolish it and put in a hand puppet theater that Obama and his fellow future tyrants can give little shows to public with to issue the latest decree to the peasants.
In response to:

Roberts' Ruling Took Guts

SemperMaximus Wrote: Jun 29, 2012 12:13 AM
Congress should pass a law that anyone named Roberts, Kagan, etc. etc. etc. and that are also members of SCOTUS will be taxed at a rate of 110% per year for life and use his ruling as precedent, failure to pay would result in being removed from SCOTUS. I wonder how Roberts would rule on that one?
Previous 21 - 30 Next