In response to:

The Roberts Opinion: It's Not All Bad

shall Wrote: Jun 28, 2012 4:46 PM
Having read the article, Roberts is still clueless and constitutionally stupid. The bone he throws in the direction of the Commerce Clause does not ameliorate the eviceration of the citizens rights under the taxation powers. The mandate clearly fails under the commerce clause; but it equally fails under the taxation powers because it is not a tax; it is a fine. Taxes, accorded under the constitution, with the limited exception of the income tax, must be apportioned among the state. A tax for not purchasing an item is a fine, and unreasonable fines are explicitly prohibited. Being fined for not buying something is per se unreasonable.
Luscious Lars Wrote: Jun 28, 2012 5:07 PM
Exactly. Anything the government wants you to do, and which you choose not to do, is now punishable by a tax, according to Roberts. The idiot says they can't levy a criminal penalty but only a tax. What happens when you don't pay the tax? You get arrested for tax evasion and thrown in jail for a criminal charge (tax evasion). Can a Chief Justice on the Supreme Court be that ignorant? I guess so, as he just demonstrated. Sheesh. Get rid of Obama and the democrats in the Senate. Improve conservative numbers in the House. November must be our Boston Tea Party.

John Roberts is not a “traitor to his philosophy.” He is not a liberal. He is, above all else, a very strict originalist, and the Chief Justice of a Court that is acutely aware – and wary – of its role in politics. Understand that his opinion, though certainly not ideal for the Right, contains more good news for conservatives in its pages than it does on its face.

So let’s take a look at his surprising opinion – the controlling opinion, as it’s called, which sets precedent and “say[s] what the law is,” as Marshall said so long...