by Doug Book, editor
Though Coach is Right published this piece in early January, the subject matter may be even more pertinent today as countless doctors refuse to treat ObamaCare patients, hospitals deny them admittance and the negative impact of the law has moved from talking point to reality.
When Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the Supreme Court’s Marxist bloc in ruling the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate constitutional, stunned conservatives immediately accused him of committing an “act of judicial cowardice.” “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices,” wrote the supremely hypocritical Roberts as he shattered one of the first rules of judicial restraint by rewriting sections of ObamaCare from the bench. Although he refused to “protect” the people, it seems he was more than willing to protect DC lawmakers from the consequences of passing unconstitutional legislation.
But did Roberts manufacture his creative penalty-is-really-a-tax revision of ObamaCare for the purpose of bailing out the lawmakers who wrote the Act? Or was it actually his intention to help destroy them! American Thinker contributor Bill Dunne believes Justice Roberts used his ObamaCare ruling to set a “diabolical trap” designed to imperil Democrats even as it “saved the Republican Party from going into a death spiral…”
It is Dunne’s contention that Justice Roberts’ decision spawned a “Great Awakening” of the American people by making it clear that “…ObamaCare [was] a civics lesson from hell, with vast implications for America’s future.” Had the Chief Justice sided with court “conservatives,” the disastrous effects of the Affordable Care Act would have disappeared with the law itself. The largest tax increase in American history would not be taking place. Millions would still have healthcare insurance which has since been cancelled by the ACA; premiums would not have doubled–or worse–thanks in part to unwanted coverages; family doctors would still be available to longtime patients; a non-functioning, $600 million website would not threaten to transform average citizens into “skofflaws.” Moreover, identity theft would not run rampant and some semblance of a right to medical privacy might still exist for the American public.
Perhaps the most important consequence of Roberts’ ruling is that millions of Americans finally understand that “…[ObamaCare] has less to do with insuring the uninsured than with one political party’s lunge for unprecedented power and control over people’s lives.” The utter contempt for individual rights which is the hallmark of DC Democrats has at last been clearly revealed to any interested American. And the fact that healthcare may no longer be affordable or available interests one Hell of a lot of Americans.
Did John Roberts assume the role of visionary in finding the ObamaCare mandate constitutional? In spite of the happy faces assumed by party loons such as Nancy Pelosi and Debbie Wasserman Shultz, Senate Democrats like Mark Udall (Co) and Mary Landrieu (La) are facing Election Day 2014 with the dread of THEIR vote being advertised as the one which passed ObamaCare into law.
Was John Roberts a gutless traitor to the American nation and people? Was he blackmailed into finding the Act constitutional? Was he hoping to become an important part of history? Or did his presumed prescience help to save the Republican Party from an historic collapse?
Whatever Justice Roberts motivation, it certainly IS the Court’s job to “protect the people” when the passage of unconstitutional legislation threatens to result in an historic abuse of political power.