Romney suggests Roberts’ health care ruling motivated by politics

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by AK Forty Seven, Jul 5, 2012.


    Romney suggests Roberts’ health care ruling motivated by politics

    Mitt Romney suggested "political consideration" rather than legal judgment may have played a major role in why Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts voted to uphold President Barack Obama's health care law last week.

    Asked about reports that Roberts switched his vote on the Affordable Care Act, Romney questioned Roberts' motivation in an interview with CBS News, which was broadcast Thursday.

    "It gives the impression that the decision was made not based upon constitutional foundation but instead political consideration about the relationship between branches of government," Romney told CBS News. "But we won't really know the answers to those things until the justice himself speaks out—maybe sometime in history."

    Romney, who had previously said he would nominate judges in the "mold of Justice Roberts," hinted he might rethink that position in light of the chief justice's ruling.
  2. Here's a guy who switched from being a Massachusetts liberal to a hard right conservative due to politics and now wants to accuse someone else of being motivated by politics
  3. Roberts as much said so himself so there's nothing stunning about this observation from Romney. The only thing stunning is the obvious double standard. 5-4 rulings seem to be just fine when in favor of the leftist position, but clearly motivated by corrupt politics when it favors the right.
  4. Yannis


    He's a politician - that's what they do, they adapt to changing circumstances. Romney has stated a million times that there's a big difference between being the perspective and responsibilities of the governor of a state and the president of the US; many things he would do and did as a governor he would not do as the president, which makes perfect sense.

    On the other hand, judges are supposed to be a lot more stable, that's the nature of that job. obviously, Roberts did not live up to that lofty ideal.

    Just to make it clear, Obama promised not to raise taxes and he did. That was way beyond him being FlipFlopper in Chief, that was proven to be a patent lie. The proof is not only in Roberts' opinion: Obama sent his legal team to the Supreme Court to argue this very point, that ObamaCare entails a great big tax being imposed on the middle class... that he supposedly protects but kicks under the table all the time. How can anyone trust that guy?
  5. Romney said he wouldn't raise taxes as Governor,but he did raise numerous fees and if the obamacare penalty is a tax so is the romneycare penalty

    <iframe width="560" height="315" src="" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
  6. How can anyone trust this guy ?

    <iframe width="420" height="315" src="" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
  7. Ricter


  8. Yannis


    I think Romney was correct - and, really, who cares who's a lobbyist and who's not? There's not even a decent definition of the term to use across all circumstances. Ganging up on a candidate to argue such a trivial point is pathetic.

    Obama lied to the American people, offcially, clearly, repeatedly. That's big, huge. Can't be trusted, period.

    Let him hire even more lobbyists to pull him out of that hole... But, of course, he already has hundreds of them running the country.
  9. Ricter


    Well then I guess you'll just have to have your billionaire butt-buddies super PAC win the election for Romney so they can run the country.

    :D :D
  10. Yannis


    Says the party of Buffett, Soros, Gates, et al et al... :D
    #10     Jul 5, 2012