Politico's close minded Glenn Thrush has a cow about Justice Roberts, commenter wonders if Thrush is off his birth control pills

3/28/12, "Politico’s Claws Out For Chief Justice Roberts," BrietbartBigJournalism, Ben Shapiro

"Glenn Thrush, alleged reporter for Politico, has decided that any legal opposition to Obamacare must spring not from Constitutional concerns – concerns mirrored by Justices Kennedy, Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and even Sotomayor in part – but from sheer politics. His piece on the Obamacare hearings is pure farce. “John Roberts On Trial,” it screams, even though Roberts is certainly not on trial:

John Roberts is having his Bush v. Gore moment. If the wily chief justice felt squeamish about leading the Supreme Court into an election-year political maelstrom, that was nowhere on display Tuesday, when the Roberts-led conservative majority signaled its collective skepticism, even hostility, for President Barack Obama’s health care law.

This isn’t about the “conservative majority” of course – it’s about the Constitution. If Thrush had paid any attention to the actual arguments, he would have spotted that the conservative judges on the Court cite the Constitution far more frequently than their liberal counterparts, who routinely descend into basic political analysis of the bill.

But Thrush isn’t interested in the truth. He’s interested in doing a hatchet job. So that’s what he does:

If the Affordable Care Act goes down — especially if it suffers the same schismatic 5-to-4 blow sustained by the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law in the Citizens United case — critics will accuse the Roberts Court of rigging the game and covering their power play with constitutional doublespeak.

And who might those “critics” be, Glenn? They couldn’t possibly be you, implying that the Roberts Court is rigging the game and covering its power play with constitutional doublespeak, could it?

Thrush’s entire case is that Roberts is a political judge rather than a judge who cares about the Constitution. But that’s not journalism. It’s opinion journalism. Thrush dug up every anti-Roberts voice he could find in order to mask his own bias – but he didn’t write a similar article on, say, Justices Ginsburg’s, Breyer’s, and Kagan’s obvious attempt yesterday to save the Solicitor General from himself by making his case for him. Instead, he blamed Roberts for not agreeing to compromise to avoid a 5-4 decision – even

• though the decision hasn’t yet come down.

There is no unanimous decision to be had here. There is no compromise – or, if there is, it will be on the issue of severability. This is a simple up-or-down vote on the individual mandate, which cannot be partially constitutional.

And, of course, Thrush keeps coming back to Bush v. Gore, which is supposedly the hallmark of highly-politicized cases – even though the actual decision is highly complex. He cites Democrat after Democrat to say that Roberts is a new Republican hack – even though Elena Kagan was a member of the Obama Administration, and made a fool of herself in yesterday’s hearings by openly shilling for Obamacare.

This was not a story. This was a hit piece. But that seems to be Politico’s specialty these days."

-------------------------

among comments

-----------------------

"Lixii

As an adult child living in his mother's basement he's worried about having his birth control pills cut off due to a lack of medical coverage when Obamacare is tossed."

-----------------------

Ed. note: ObamaCare isn't even "Barack Obama's healthcare law," as the close-minded Politico employee states. Obama wasn't the author of most if any of it and certainly couldn't have studied its 3000 pages and held consultations in the 2 days between its delivery to him and his signing. If anything, his contribution leading up to the signing was in approving giveaways in exchange for votes he needed. If insuring the uninsured was Obama's goal, he could've accomplished that with 5 pages.

• Rather than a 'signature legislative achievement,' it was the inevitable outcome of 2 things.
  

First, the Bush crowd's performance for 8 years was so bad the GOP almost became extinct. Bush gave the House back to the democrats in 2006, was happy about it, said democrats would likely favor things he wanted more than republicans (I heard him say this in an interview). Continuing along, by 2008 there were almost no Republicans left in the House and not all that many in the Senate. Finally, Obama's alleged GOP challenger, John McCain, did not want to win, scolded ordinary Americans who were concerned about their country, and did a better job selling Obama than himself. Not helpful to other Republicans running that year. What remained of the GOP were a few clubhouse Beltway types who couldn't care less about the country and would be happy being the permanent minority. To the degree anyone votes on the Republican line today it's because of the Tea Party which the GOP establishment does its best to ignore.

3/21/10, "House Passes Historic Health Care Bill," NPR

3/23/10, "Health Care Bill Signed by Obama," CBS News

March 2010, "Sleazy backroom deals on Obamacare," Washington Examiner, Editorial

==================

9/14/11, "Storming the Castle," by Richard Fernandez

"Editorial Reviews

"It is a pamphlet describing how gradually yet irresistibly, Washington became the dominated by a party of incumbents. Whether they are Democrat or Republican, politicians have now become a permanent class in the capital, existing along with a giant bureaucracy, operating the government for their own sake. Unless that is changed, they will simply continue to increasing

• until they bankrupt the country."

=================

11/4/2010, "Ruling Class GOP Declare War on Country Class Conservatives," Rush Limbaugh

"So it appears to me they're (the GOP establishment) perfectly happy being in the minority if it means not supporting conservatives." (parag. 24 in Rush Limbaugh transcript.)

.